Agenda packet — San Anselmo City Council, April 26, 2022

Town Council
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
Agenda
Town Council Chambers (Via Zoom
during COVID)
Tuesday, April 26, 2022 7:00 PM
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87490306845
Or Telephone: +1 669 900 6833 | Webinar ID: 874 9030 6845 How to Submit Comments Before the Meeting: Members of the public are encouraged to submit email correspondence to [email protected] before the meeting begins.

How to Participate During the Meeting: Members of the public will have the option to speak during the meeting through the Zoom application by using their phone or an electronic device.

For PC, Mac, or smart phone, Use “Raise hand” function when public comment for an item is requested. It is a button that is located at the top or bottom of your screen, based on your computer For landline phones, raise hand to be recognized with *9

1. 6:40 pm Interviews with applicants to the Climate Action Committee.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Board and Commission Status Report
Attachment 2 - Christiana Conser
Attachment 3 - Judith O'Rourke
Attachments:

Call to Order. Optional Pledge of Allegiance: The Mayor or a designated Council member will recite the Pledge of Allegiance for members of the Council and the public who wish to join in the recitation.

Open time for public expression.

Council requests for future agenda items.

Page 1 of 4 ends

1 Town Council Agenda April 26, 2022

2. Consent Agenda:

2.1. April 12, 2022 Town Council Minutes
Attachments: April 12, 2022 Minutes

2.2. Quarterly Treasurer’s Investment Report, March 31, 2022 Staff Report
Quarterly Investment Report, 03-22
Attachments:

2.3. Revenue and Expenditure Reports, March 2022
Staff Report
Budget Comparison Report - San Anselmo, CA_Sub_MAR 2022 Budget Comparison Report - San Anselmo, CA_Dept_MAR 2022 Attachments:

2.4. Financial Report on Recreation Fund
Staff Report
March 2022-Attachment
Attachments:

2.5. Authorize the Town Manager to enter into an Agreement with Consultant Regarding the Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS) Project.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - PSA with Bob Brown ODDS
EXHIBIT A to ATTACHMENT 1 - ODDS Proposal Scope of Work Attachments:

2.6. Special Event Application: Hope on the Rize
Staff Report
Hope on the Rize May Event App 2022
Attachments:

2.7. Chamber of Commerce’s ‘San Anselmo Live on the Avenue’ June Extension Event Application.

Staff Report
Chamber - On the Ave Special Event App June 2022-combined Attachments:

2.8. Accept Brookside Elementary School Sidewalk Gap Closure project Staff Report
Brookside Sidewalk- Notice of Completion
Attachments:

Page 2 of 4 ends

2 Town Council Agenda April 26, 2022

2.9. Appoint applicants to the Climate Action Committee.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Board and Commission Status Report
Attachment 2 - Christiana Conser
Attachment 3 - Judith O'Rourke
Attachments:

Council Items:

3. Receive presentation regarding Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority projects and provide direction to staff.

4. Annual Crime and Traffic Report from Central Marin Police Authority.

5. Climate Action Update
Attachments: Staff Report

6. Presentation regarding Flood Zone 9.

7. Amending the Master Fee Schedule of the Town of San Anselmo Staff Report
Resolution Amend Fee Schedule w CPI
Fee Schedule FY22-23
Comprehensive Fee Study Report
Attachments:

8. Water Conservation Efforts Town Wide and Memorial Park Field Renovation Project Staff Report
Attachment 1 1.pdf
Attachment 2 TEC report.pdf
Attachment 3 Field w wells etc..pdf
Attachment 4 Memorial Park Field H2O REDUC 03-28-22.irf (002).pdf Attachment 5 San Anselmo Field StormTech Drawings_2022-0330.pdf Public Comment
Further Public Comment
Attachments:

9. Introduction and first reading of an Ordinance to repeal and replace San Anselmo Municipal Code Chapter 2-5 “Purchasing”, the Town’s purchasing policy, and amend Chapter 2 “Town Manager” for consistency with purchasing policy.

Staff Report
Draft Ordinance
Attachments:

Page 3 of 4 ends

3 Town Council Agenda April 26, 2022

10. Emergency Sinkhole Response at Center Boulevard Bridge Attachments: Staff Report
Adjourn
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Town Staff at email [email protected]. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable accommodation to help insure accessibility to this meeting.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Town Council regarding any item on this agenda after the distribution of the original packet will be made available for public inspection at the public counter at Town Hall located at 525 San Anselmo Avenue.

Notice is hereby given that Council may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on this agenda. If any of these matters above are challenged in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at any public hearing described on this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered at, or prior to, this Council meeting. Judicial review of an administrative decision of the Town Council must be filed with the Court not later than the 90th day following the date of the Council’s decision (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6) Any item not under discussion before 10:00 p.m. may be continued to the next regular meeting. Next regular meeting is Tuesday, May 10, 2022.

I certify that this agenda was posted on the Public Notice Bulletin Board on or before Friday, April 22, 2022.
____________________________
Carla Kacmar, Town Clerk

Page 4 of 4 ends

4 Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 1.

SUBJECT:

Interviews with applicants to the Climate Action Committee. 6:40 PM Christina Conser
6:50 PM Judith O’Rourke
Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 5
ITEM 1 – ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 1 – ATTACHMENT 1
Board, Committee,
Commission
(total seats)
Seats
Expiring/
Vacant
Applicants Term
(Yrs)1
Date of
Interview
Arts Commission
7 seats + youth Dannielle Mauk
(Temporary Expansion to 8 seats)
3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee
7 seats Sean Condry
4 Board of Review
5 seats Jeff Zuba
2 6
Capital Programs
Monitoring Committee
7 seats Sean Condry
3 4
Economic Development Committee
7 seats Elise Semonian
3 Financial Advisory Committee
5 seats Jeff Zuba
(Temporary Expansion to 6 seats)
1 Kfir Lindheim 3
Flood Committee
7 seats Sean Condry
2 4
Historical Commission
11 seats+ youth Linda Kenton
4 Library Advisory Board
7 seats+ youth Linda Kenton
4 Library Tax Oversight Committee
5 seats Linda Kenton
3 Marin Commission On Aging
1 seat
3 Mosquito Abatement District
1 seat
2-4
Open Space Committee
11 seats + youth Elise Semonian
4 Parks & Recreation Commission
7 seats + youth Dannielle Mauk
1 4
Planning Commission
7 seats Elise Semonian
1 Kim Pipkin
Peter Thomas Strauss
4 Racial Equity Ad Hoc Committee 1
Climate Action Commission
7 seats+ youth Elise Semonian
3 Christiana Conser
Judith O’Rourke
3 Ross Valley Paramedic Authority
1 seat
4 Tax Equity Board
3 seats Jeff Zuba
1 3
* Incumbent
1 Per Commission Guidelines, differing term lengths may be allowed to accomplish a staggering of the appointment schedule.
6 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
7 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
8 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
9 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
10 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
11 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
12 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
13 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 2
14 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
15 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
16 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
17 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
18 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
19 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
20 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
21 ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 1 - ATTACHMENT 3
22 Tuesday, April 12, 2022
7:00 PM
Town of San Anselmo
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
Town Council Chambers (via Zoom during COVID)
Town Council
Minutes
Item 2.1 Item 2.1
23 Town Council Minutes April 12, 2022

1. 5:45 PM Announce adjournment to closed session: Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation - Initiation of litigation pursuant to § 54956.9(d)(4): (1 case) 6:15 PM Closed Session: Conference with Labor Negotiators (§ 54957.6) Agency designated representatives: Dave Donery, Jeff Zuba and Christopher Boucher Employee organizations: Service Employees International Union, Local 1021; Management Employees; Confidential Employees
Call to Order. Optional Pledge of Allegiance: The Mayor or a designated Council member will recite the Pledge of Allegiance for members of the Council and the public who wish to join in the recitation.

Mayor Fineman stated there was nothing to report in the closed session.

Open time for public expression.

Matthew Holt, Sarah Sweet, Donna Nicolletti, Nicole F., Clare Ciafrei, Pamela Odetto, and Kyle Marie spoke in support of built-in rent control and just cause eviction control to guarantee housing security.

Laurie Berliner, local landlord, wanted the town engage landlords in any potential discussion.

Council requests for future agenda items.

Vice Mayor Burdo spoke of the Racial Equity Committee meeting where they received proposals regarding the policy audit. Burdo also invited everyone to participate in the annual egg hunt at Memorial Park. Burdo asked if Council would consider a rent stabilization item for the future. The item failed for lack of a majority.

Council member Greene wanted a report on the housing element process and a report on the impact of repairing the recent sinkhole at a future meeting. Greene spoke of the Flood Zone 9 meeting and the future of the flood mitigation project in downtown San Anselmo.

Council Member Colbert joined the Mayor of Berkeley at a United Against Hate event. Colbert also attended a United Against Anti-Semitism event. Colbert mentioned Marin Transit where they spoke of yellow school bus funding. Transportation Authority of Marin held an executive committee meeting, where they received a legislative update. TAM is really focused on climate change. TAM also brought forth a congestion management program. Colbert took a history walk that was organized by the San Anselmo Historical Commission.

Mayor Fineman attended a Community Development Block Grant meeting and San Anselmo Connect meeting. At the Connect meeting, they discussed the reusable food ordinance. Fineman spoke of the Climate Action Commission meeting where they discussed the Town's fleet of vehicles. Fineman went to the art opening at Town Books. Fineman spoke of the Racial Equity meeting where they heard from a district attorney who had been working to close some loopholes in terms of prosecuting hate crimes. Fineman mentioned an upcoming community workshop on parklets. Fineman also thanked

Page 1 of 6 ends

Item 2.1 Item 2.1
24 Town Council Minutes April 12, 2022
staff for their role in making virtual and hybrid meetings possible.

Town Manager Donery presented that the Town had issued a request for proposal for the housing element and that representatives from the County had been invited to discuss Flood Zone 9 on April

26. Librarian Kenton gave the new hours for the library and invited everyone to the Night of the Poets. Public Works Director Condry gave a brief overview of the a sinkhole that had appeared in the past week.

2. Consent Agenda:

Greene pulled Items 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7.

M/s, Brian Colbert, Eileen Burke, to approve Items 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10.

Mayor Alexis Fineman, Vice Mayor Steve Burdo, Eileen Burke, Ford Greene, and Brian Colbert
PRESENT:

ABSENT: None

2.1. Minutes of March 22, 2022 Town Council Meeting.

Attachments: March 22, 2022 Minutes

2.2. Minutes of March 25, 2022 Special Town Council Meeting.

Attachments: March 25, 2022 Minutes

2.3. Report of Warrants Issued, March 2022
Attachments: Staff Report
Warrant Report_March 2022

2.4. Consider Adoption of Resolution to Allow for Virtual Town Council Meetings in Compliance with AB 361.

Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution

2.5. Special Event Application: The Arts Commission’s Beatles Tribute Event Attachments: Staff Report
Beatles Event Application 2022
With regard to Beatles Event, Greene stated it had the potential to be a super spreader event. O'Grady stated the Town was following County guidance and was willing to put something in the contract like they do for the music series.

2.6. Review the report from a Marin Municipal Water District representative.

Attachments: Staff Report
Attachment 1

Page 2 of 6 ends

Item 2.1 Item 2.1
25 Town Council Minutes April 12, 2022
With regard to this report, Greene wanted to highlight that Marin Municipal Water District is prohibiting lawns and decorative grass in future developments, in business complexes and street medians as a water saving effort.

2.7. Consider approving the Town of San Anselmo’s participation in the 2022 Mayors’ Monarch Pledge through the National Wildlife Federation Attachments: Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Mayor's Monarch Pledge Proclamation 2022 With regard to this item, Greene wanted to highlight the Monarch Pledge.

2.8. Resolution for CalRecycle Payment and Grant Programs Attachments: Staff Report
Attachment 1

2.9. 2022 Slurry Seal project
Attachments: Staff Report
Town street map- 2022 slurry

2.10. San Anselmo Arts Commission’s Utility Box Art Project - Phase 3 Attachments: Staff Report
Phase 3 Utility Box Project Selections & Timeline
Council Items:

3. Town Council receive presentation on the results of the Measure D renewal public opinion survey and consider putting a proposed measure to be placed on the November 2022 General Election ballot.

Attachments: Staff Report
Attachment 1 - San Anselmo Sales Tax Renewal Survey
Presentation 04-12-22
Town Manager Donery presented the staff report. Brian Godbe from Godbe research made the presentation.

Greene asked for clarification regarding the sunset provision and the support for it as balanced against the criticism of it. Godbe stated 72% said they vote yes. Mayor Fineman asked for the process to end a tax. Godbe stated it would be a citizen's initiative process.

There was Council consensus to move forward with the 1 cent tax increase. A majority of Council was is in support of the forever tax. Fineman stated she was not in support of that language because she felt like there needed to be more check points to address the most current issues.

Page 3 of 6 ends

Item 2.1 Item 2.1
26 Town Council Minutes April 12, 2022

4. Annual Crime and Traffic Report from Central Marin Police Authority M/s, Eileen Burke, Ford Greene, to continue the annual crime and traffic report form CMPA to a future meeting.

AYE: Mayor Fineman, Burke, Greene, and Colbert
NO: Vice Mayor Burdo
ABSENT: None

5. ‘San Anselmo Live on the Avenue’ Music Series & Street Closures Attachments: Staff Report
Live on the Avenue Event Application 2022
parking map
Business Owners LetterNotice 4.5.22
Public Comment
Further Public Comment
Recreation Director Mauk presented the staff report.

Burke asked about the budget for the event. Mauk stated the Town was trying to formalize the event this year. Burke asked about the event sponsor and why aren't they paying for the whole event. Mauk stated the event is 64 bands so the amount donated will not cover that many bands.

Laurie Berliner, Staysea Coulteax, Colleen, business owners, spoke against the 4:30 pm closures because it affected business.

Marc Quinones and Frank Gomez, business owners, and Benedetto Cico, Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of the event.

There was a Council consensus for a soft closing at 5:30 pm and wanted to see Police enforcement during the closings. Burke felt the event did not have to happen 64 times and only supported as many of these events as are sponsored. Burdo and Colbert supported the staff recommendation. Burdo wanted to revisit the item next year to organize with the Chamber of Commerce and discuss the budget in that case.

M/s, Ford Greene, Steve Burdo, to approve ‘San Anselmo Live on the Avenue’ Music Series & Street Closures
AYE: Mayor Fineman, Vice Mayor Burdo, Burke, Greene, and Colbert NO: None
ABSENT: None

6. Consider approval of increase to the Town of San Anselmo’s financial contribution from

Page 4 of 6 ends

Item 2.1 Item 2.1
27 Town Council Minutes April 12, 2022
$30,500 annually to $35,500 toward the 2022/23 fiscal year to be paid to the Ross Valley Yellow Bus Program.

Attachments: Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Ross Valley Yellow Bus JEPA Packet - 03.21.22 Town Manager Donery presented the staff report.

Burke stated ridership had dropped almost by half and costs have gone up. Burke was not sure it made sense to throw more money at it.

M/s, Ford Greene, Steve Burdo, to approve increase to the Town of San Anselmo’s financial contribution from $30,500 annually to $35,500 toward the 2022/23 fiscal year to be paid to the Ross Valley Yellow Bus Program.

AYE: Mayor Fineman, Vice Mayor Burdo, and Colbert
NO: Burke, and Greene
ABSENT: None

7. Water Conservation Efforts Town Wide and Memorial Park Field Renovation Project Attachments: Staff Report
Attachment 1 1.pdf
Attachment 2 TEC report.pdf
Attachment 3 Field w wells etc..pdf
Attachment 4 Memorial Park Field H2O REDUC 03-28-22.irf (002).pdf
Attachment 5 San Anselmo Field StormTech
Drawings_2022-0330.pdf
Public Comment
Further Public Comment
M/s Greene, Burke to continue Item 7 to a future meeting.

AYE: Mayor Fineman, Burke, Greene, and Colbert
NO: Vice Mayor Burdo
ABSENT: None

8. Establishing Job Description and Pay Range for Public Works Manager Position

Page 5 of 6 ends

Item 2.1 Item 2.1
28 Town Council Minutes April 12, 2022
Attachments: Staff Report
Attachment 1 - 2021-22 mgmt resolution
Resolution Establishing Job Description and Pay Range for the Pubilc Works Manager
Job Description - PW Manager
Public Comment
M/s Greene, Burke to continue Item 8 to a future meeting.

AYE: Mayor Fineman, Burke, Greene, and Colbert
NO: Vice Mayor Burdo
ABSENT: None

9. Receive presentation regarding Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority projects and provide direction to staff.

M/s Greene, Burke to continue Item 9 to a future meeting.

AYE: Mayor Fineman, Burke, Greene, and Colbert
NO: Vice Mayor Burdo
ABSENT: None

10. Adjourn

Page 6 of 6 ends

Item 2.1 Item 2.1
29 Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.2.

FROM:

Jeff Zuba, Finance & Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:

Quarterly Treasurer’s Investment Report, March 31, 2022

RECOMMENDATION
That Council approve the Treasurer’s Investment Report for the quarter ending March 31, 2022.

BACKGROUND
The Treasurer’s Investment Report is a quarterly itemization of the market value of Town investments. The purpose of this report is to present financial information for review and discussion.

ANALYSIS
The attached report itemizes the Town’s investments and states the market value of each investment as of March 31, 2022. The Wells Fargo bank account is the Town’s primary checking account used for the deposit and expenditure of operating funds. The Bank of America checking account is a controlled account used for payroll processing only.

The Town maintains two Local Agency Investment Fund accounts (LAIF) for the purpose of maximizing interest income on funds not needed for immediate expenditure. One LAIF account is for investment of general operating funds. The other is for the remaining series 2003 Measure G bond proceeds, required by law to be maintained in a segregated account.

CONCLUSION
The Town’s cash balances as of March 31, 2022, are $11,070,462 which is $4,205,954 more than the balances at this time last year. This increase is driven by timing of cash flow between money received versus money to be paid out the following period.

Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 30
ITEM 2.2 - ATTACHMENT 1
31 ITEM 2.2 - ATTACHMENT 1
Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.3.

FROM:

Jeff Zuba, Finance & Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:

Revenue and Expenditure Reports, March 2022

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the monthly year-to-date Revenue and Expenditure Reports and corresponding activity for the period ending through March 31, 2022.

BACKGROUND
Every reporting period end, the Town of San Anselmo presents to the Town Council its operations as shown on the Revenue and Expenditure reports for discussion and approval. The Revenue and Expenditure reports are year-to-date summaries of revenues and expenditures from the Town’s financial system (‘Tyler Incode’) for both the current as well as the prior corresponding fiscal year. These reports include the General Fund’s operations given most of the Town-level operational activities are processed through the General Fund either directly or indirectly. This approval is to be obtained once a month within the fiscal year.

ANALYSIS
The revenue and expenditure data through March 31, 2022, is a compilation of all operating activity that is year-to-date for the current and prior fiscal year. These reports are sourced directly from the Town’s financial system, of which a corresponding analysis has been performed identifying the key trends the Town Council should take note about.

Revenues
Overall, through the March 2022 reporting period end, the Town’s General Fund revenue has expanded its base relative to prior year by $0.749M. This is primarily from the increase in property taxes, sales taxes, franchise tax, and fines offset by other fees and Transfers In. All other activity is either flat year-over-year or nets correspondingly to an immaterial change-all of which are within management’s expectations.

Category MAR YTD FY22 MAR YTD FY21 $ Change % Change
Property Tax 8,109,711.64 7,632,750.76 476,960.88 6.25% Sales Tax 957,880.86 726,033.37 231,847.49 31.93%
Property Transfer Tax 122,440.00 97,866.00 24,574.00 25.11% Franchise Taxes 469,625.63 435,393.48 34,232.15 7.86%
Licenses & Permits 869,281.83 872,693.51 (3,411.68) -0.39% Fines 56,391.06 30,801.56 25,589.50 83.08%
Cash & Investment Interest 7,065.61 6,972.30 93.31 1.34% Intergovernmental 119,829.50 106,241.05 13,588.45 12.79% Other Fees 231,161.07 222,888.23 8,272.84 3.71%
Transfers In 290,168.60 352,907.87 (62,739.27) -17.78%
Total 11,233,555.80 10,484,548.13 749,007.67 7.14%
As shown above, the Town’s revenue base overall increased by $0.749M of which is driven by Property Taxes, Sales Tax, Franchise Taxes and Fines:
· Property Taxes increased by $0.476M compared to the prior period due to increased values on properties. · Sales Taxes increased by $0.231M compared to the prior period is a result of improving economic conditions from the COVID-19 Pandemic conditions within the Town’s boundaries. With greater confidence in security and safety of public health, consumer sentiment is rising giving way to increased sales transactions. · Property Transfer Tax increased by $0.024M compared to the prior period following the active real estate market.
· Franchise Taxes increased by $0.034M compared to the prior period due to rate increases by the service providers.
· Fines increased by $0.025M compared to the prior period as enforcement returns to normal following relaxed protocols during the heigh of the pandemic.

The largest decreases to note ($0.062M) transfers into the General Fund. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic $0.060M was returned in FY20 to the General Fund from the Robson House Fund as the project for dry rot repair and exterior painting was put on hold. As far as the other revenue streams, these changes either decreased or remained relatively flat yearover-year resulting in an immaterial change.

Expenditures
Overall, through the March 2022 reporting period end, the Town’s General Fund expenditures have increased compared to the prior year by $0.610M. This is primarily from increases in compensation, CalPERS retirement payments, Outside Services, and other expenditures. All other activity is either flat year-over-year or nets correspondingly to an immaterial change-all of which are within management’s expectations.

Category MAR YTD FY22 MAR YTD FY21 $ Change % Change
Compensation 2,402,550.41 2,213,090.27 189,460.14 8.56% Retirement 827,892.34 728,183.41 99,708.93 13.69%
Training 19,543.64 5,025.68 14,517.96 288.88%
Outside Services 8,282,383.40 7,957,824.81 324,558.59 4.08% Maintenance 100,447.44 85,634.14 14,813.30 17.30%
Utilities 140,486.95 153,205.95 (12,719.00) -8.30%
Supplies 84,437.46 79,695.34 4,742.12 5.95%
Debt Service 117,132.54 116,857.77 274.77 0.24%
Other Expenditure 106,608.67 46,448.14 60,160.53 129.52% Transfers Out 1,263,517.00 1,348,517.00 (85,000.00) -6.30% Total 13,344,999.85 12,734,482.51 610,517.34 4.79%
As shown above, the Town’s expenditures base overall increased by $0.610M of which is driven by Compensation, Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 3 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 33
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.3.

CalPERS Retirement payments, Outside Services, and Transfers Out payments:
· Compensation (Salaries & Wages and Benefits) increased by $0.189M compared to the prior fiscal year primarily due to the 5% maximum salary reduction put in place for the previous fiscal year. This salary reduction affected both SEIU and Unrepresented Town employees through the end of the 2021 fiscal year. In addition, the employee groups received cost of living adjustments on July 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. · Expenditures relating to CalPERS retirement increased by $0.098M due to the Town’s required unfunded pension liability payment. The required retirement payment to CalPERS is a combination of both the contribution for the active and retired employees. This payment increased by $80,985 as compared to the previous fiscal year.
· Outside Services decreased by $0.325M compared to the previous fiscal year due to the changes in payments for Public Safety JPA’s and construction project activity. · Transfers to other funds decreased by $0.085M due to mid-year budget transfers in the previous fiscal year for project activity.

As far as the other expenditure streams, these changes either slightly changed or remained flat year-over-year resulting in an immaterial change. All other changes are taken together overall immaterial for further discussion and are expected given the Town’s operations.

CONCLUSION
As inspected, the Town’s financial position is continuously improving compared to the prior fiscal year given the economic recovery from the COVID-19 Pandemic. In anticipation through the end of the current fiscal year, these trends are expected to continue with increased revenue collection from this positive economic traction.

Attachment #1: Revenue and Expenditure Report by subcategory, March 2022 Attachment #2: Expenditure Report by department, March 2022 Town of San Anselmo Page 3 of 3 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 34
ITEM 2.3 - ATTACHMENT 1
Town of San Anselmo
2021-2022 Rev & Exp Report
as of 03/31/2022
2020-2021
Revised
Budget
2020-2021
Audited
Actuals
2020-2021
YTD Actuals
% of
Audited
Actuals
2021-2022
Adopted
Budget
2021-2022
Revised
Budget
2021-2022
YTD Actuals
% of
Actual /
Budget
Fund: 01 - GENERAL FUND
Revenue
400 - PROPERTY TAX GENERAL 7,953,590.00 8,128,724.86 4,560,986.24 56.11 % 8,376,892.00 8,376,892.00 4,863,391.68 58.06 % 401 - PENSION 2,039,162.00 2,490,632.38 1,373,875.08 55.16 % 2,291,981.00 2,291,981.00 1,486,993.35 64.88 % 402 - PROPERTY TAX OTHER 2,717,576.00 3,376,535.46 1,697,889.44 50.28 % 3,265,116.00 3,265,116.00 1,759,326.61 53.88 % 410 - OTHER TAXES 1,218,100.00 1,456,718.47 823,919.37 56.56 % 1,324,486.00 1,440,000.00 1,080,320.86 75.02 % 411 - FRANCHISE TAXES 745,630.00 807,418.78 435,393.48 53.92 % 750,630.00 750,630.00 469,625.63 62.56 % 420 - BUSINESS LICENSE 180,000.00 292,105.63 197,065.23 67.46 % 240,000.00 240,000.00 176,958.83 73.73 % 421 - PARKING 5,500.00 11,264.58 6,754.93 59.97 % 24,500.00 24,500.00 6,512.67 26.58 % 422 - CONSTRUCTION 809,000.00 1,006,976.29 668,873.35 66.42 % 900,000.00 980,000.00 685,810.33 69.98 % 430 - VEHICLE CODE 10,000.00 18,042.79 8,518.16 47.21 % 10,000.00 17,500.00 15,996.97 91.41 % 431 - LIBRARY 200.00 1,205.41 137.17 11.38 % 0.00 0.00 766.83 0.00 % 432 - PARKING 27,000.00 42,314.81 22,146.23 52.34 % 50,000.00 65,000.00 39,627.26 60.97 % 440 - USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY 10,000.00 76,486.94 6,972.30 9.12 % 15,000.00 15,000.00 7,065.61 47.10 % 450 - STATE REVENUE 144,800.00 152,155.19 106,241.05 69.82 % 107,500.00 107,500.00 119,829.50 111.47 % 460 - FEDERAL REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 470 - LOCAL AGENCY REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 480 - FEES FOR SERVICES 172,000.00 221,754.24 167,624.87 75.59 % 171,000.00 171,000.00 145,028.75 84.81 % 490 - MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 90,900.00 78,215.46 55,263.36 70.66 % 97,500.00 97,500.00 86,132.32 88.34 % 519 - TRANSFERS IN 447,087.00 420,968.92 352,907.87 83.83 % 418,464.00 418,464.00 290,168.60 69.34 % 520 - SOURCE OF PROCEEDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % Total Revenue: 16,570,545.00 18,581,520.21 10,484,568.13 56.42 % 18,043,069.00 18,261,083.00 11,233,555.80 61.52 % Expense
600 - SALARIES AND WAGES 2,471,371.00 2,245,428.15 1,702,991.79 75.84 % 2,887,665.00 2,887,665.00 1,879,030.63 65.07 % 601 - RETIREMENT 830,820.00 779,893.84 728,183.41 93.37 % 960,932.00 960,932.00 827,892.34 86.16 % 602 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 671,150.00 555,400.10 449,573.48 80.95 % 782,423.50 782,423.50 464,339.60 59.35 % 604 - RETIREE BENEFITS 139,622.00 139,622.00 60,525.00 43.35 % 144,322.00 144,322.00 59,180.18 41.01 % 610 - TRAINING 32,200.00 10,659.57 5,025.68 47.15 % 40,200.00 40,200.00 19,543.64 48.62 % 611 - OUTSIDE SERVICES 10,380,759.00 10,826,178.87 7,957,824.81 73.51 % 11,039,241.00 11,269,241.00 8,282,383.40 73.50 % 613 - PUBLICATION / DUES 15,550.00 9,366.97 9,345.65 99.77 % 15,550.00 15,550.00 19,356.58 124.48 % 614 - MAINTENANCE 21,600.00 13,933.03 9,238.08 66.30 % 21,600.00 21,600.00 11,490.70 53.20 % 615 - BUILDING MAINTENANCE 128,950.00 154,733.30 76,396.06 49.37 % 189,950.00 189,950.00 88,814.83 46.76 % 616 - VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 6,500.00 2,425.66 0.00 0.00 % 6,500.00 6,500.00 141.91 2.18 % 617 - UTILITIES 221,740.00 252,211.91 153,205.95 60.74 % 210,740.00 210,740.00 140,486.95 66.66 % 618 - HIRING 0.00 2,357.11 632.11 26.82 % 1,000.00 1,000.00 14,750.23 1,475.02 % 619 - MISCELLANEOUS 19,000.00 -231.12 -500.00 216.34 % 18,500.00 18,500.00 11,170.00 60.38 % 620 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 34,800.00 20,755.39 13,848.60 66.72 % 36,200.00 36,200.00 14,317.67 39.55 % 622 - DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 45,200.00 86,129.01 60,364.84 70.09 % 45,700.00 45,700.00 58,719.58 128.49 % 623 - BOOKS / MAGAZINES / VIDEOS 23,373.00 6,848.11 5,481.90 80.05 % 23,373.00 23,373.00 11,400.21 48.78 % 629 - MISCELLANEOUS 77,000.00 72,018.87 36,970.38 51.33 % 76,500.00 76,500.00 61,331.86 80.17 % 630 - EQUIPMENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 500.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 % 631 - CAPITAL OUTLAY - CONSTRUCTION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 640 - PRINCIPAL 211,000.00 211,000.00 106,000.00 50.24 % 227,000.00 227,000.00 113,000.00 49.78 % 641 - INTEREST 19,018.00 16,901.83 10,857.77 64.24 % 11,208.00 11,208.00 4,132.54 36.87 % 670 - TRANSFERS OUT 1,348,517.00 1,348,517.00 1,348,517.00 100.00 % 1,263,517.00 1,263,517.00 1,263,517.00 100.00 % Total Expense: 16,698,170.00 16,754,149.60 12,734,482.51 76.01 % 18,002,621.50 18,232,621.50 13,344,999.85 73.19 % Total Fund: 01 - GENERAL FUND: -127,625.00 1,827,370.61 -2,249,914.38 40,447.50 28,461.50 -2,111,444.05 Report Total: -127,625.00 1,827,370.61 -2,249,914.38 40,447.50 28,461.50 -2,111,444.05 ITEM 2.3 - ATTACHMENT 1
35 ITEM 2.3 - ATTACHMENT 2
Town of San Anselmo
2021-2022 Rev & Exp Report
as of 03/31/2022
2020-2021
Revised
Budget
2020-2021
Audited
Actuals
2020-2021
YTD Actuals
% of
Audited
Actuals
2021-2022
Adopted
Budget
2021-2022
Revised
Budget
2021-2022
YTD Actuals
% of
Actual /
Budget
Fund: 01 - GENERAL FUND
Expense
00 - UNDESIGNATED 1,348,517.00 1,348,517.00 1,348,517.00 100.00 % 1,263,517.00 1,263,517.00 1,263,517.00 100.00 % 11 - TOWN COUNCIL 95,323.00 36,904.54 30,339.30 82.21 % 95,323.00 95,323.00 24,713.70 25.93 % 12 - ADMINISTRATION 1,196,257.00 1,082,515.02 801,624.10 74.05 % 1,403,741.50 1,423,741.50 876,160.94 61.54 % 16 - LEGAL SERVICES 205,000.00 315,276.23 191,369.83 60.70 % 300,000.00 300,000.00 217,128.01 72.38 % 18 - PLANNING 407,296.00 356,215.18 269,651.54 75.70 % 638,270.00 638,270.00 256,119.51 40.13 % 21 - NON-DEPARTMENTAL 1,056,651.00 967,944.26 857,424.45 88.58 % 1,159,369.00 1,159,369.00 954,332.48 82.31 % 30 - POLICE 4,540,998.00 4,546,888.17 3,415,682.25 75.12 % 4,685,857.00 4,685,857.00 3,522,998.23 75.18 % 32 - ROSS VALLEY FIRE SERVICE 4,391,395.00 4,382,001.59 3,268,421.28 74.59 % 4,611,448.00 4,611,448.00 3,394,004.22 73.60 % 40 - DEBT SERVICE 226,518.00 226,417.85 115,373.79 50.96 % 234,708.00 234,708.00 118,532.54 50.50 % 41 - ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION 1,167,307.00 1,283,354.81 878,324.28 68.44 % 1,326,648.00 1,406,648.00 1,060,276.02 75.38 % 42 - STREETS 835,488.00 900,353.28 613,340.65 68.12 % 890,957.50 920,957.50 681,369.29 73.98 % 71 - LIBRARY 613,159.00 561,377.89 444,055.85 79.10 % 729,255.50 729,255.50 456,533.60 62.60 % 81 - PARKS 361,249.00 505,007.96 319,577.61 63.28 % 382,079.50 482,079.50 331,631.24 68.79 % 82 - RECREATION/GENERAL FUND 253,012.00 241,375.82 180,780.58 74.90 % 281,447.50 281,447.50 187,683.07 66.68 % Total Expense: 16,698,170.00 16,754,149.60 12,734,482.51 76.01 % 18,002,621.50 18,232,621.50 13,344,999.85 73.19 % Total Fund: 01 - GENERAL FUND: 16,698,170.00 16,754,149.60 12,734,482.51 76.01 % 18,002,621.50 18,232,621.50 13,344,999.85 73.19 % Report Total: 16,698,170.00 16,754,149.60 12,734,482.51 76.01 % 18,002,621.50 18,232,621.50 13,344,999.85 73.19 % ITEM 2.3 - ATTACHMENT 2
36 Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.4.

FROM:

Dannielle Mauk, Director of Community Services
SUBJECT:

Financial Report on Recreation Fund

RECOMMENDATION
That the Council approve the Recreation Fund Revenue and Expenditure Report for the period ending March 31, 2022.

BACKGROUND
The Recreation Department offers a wide variety of fee-based programs throughout the fiscal year including sports programs and leagues, youth and adult classes, childcare and camps. Additional revenue is generated through facility rentals and administrative fees.

DISCUSSION
As of March 31, 2022, 75% of the fiscal year has elapsed and the Recreation Fund is listed at 142% of projected revenues and 80% of projected expenditures.

Enrollment for recreation programs is much higher than expected for FY 2021-22. As a result, the expenditures will also be higher. The budget was drafted with numbers based on County Public Health orders for COVID 19. As the orders have changed, the department has been able to serve more members of the community.

It is also important to note that the current budget has a $158,744 deficit which is reflected in the difference between the revenue budgeted at $1,348,625 and the budgeted expenditures of $1,507,369.

March reflects the beginning of summer camp enrollments. The revenue that is collected for summer programs after July 1, 2022, will be deferred to FY 2022-23.

The State and County Public Health Orders for COVID-19 are designed to ensure and protect the health of our residents.

The orders change the Recreation Department’s ability to offer services, programs, and rentals. The Department continues to follow all guidance.

For historical comparison purposes, staff has developed the following table:

FY Revenue Expenditures Rev Over/(Under) Exp
Budget Actual % BudgetActual% $$ %
2021-22 1,348,6251,908,595142% 1,507,369 1,213,252 80% 695,342 52% 2020-21 1,408,125957,660 68% 1,550,947 857,38555% 100,274 7% 2019-20 1,627,2691,603,49199% 1,676,763 1,270,916 76% 332,575 20% 2018-19 1,510,6041,586,775105% 1,591,144 1,047,174 66% 539,601 36% 2017-18 1,514,0001,402,0293% 1,644,385 1,037,903 63% 364,126 24% 2016-17 1,384,3251,401,167101% 1,500,570 1,023,908 68% 377,259 27.3% 2015-16 1,246,6891,250,450100% 1,356,689 1,068,959 79% 181,492 14.6% Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 38
Item 2.4 - Attachment 1
Item 2.4 - Attachment 1 1
39 Item 2.4 - Attachment 1
Item 2.4 - Attachment 1
2 Item 2.4 - Attachment 1
2 40
Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.5.

FROM:

David P. Donery, Town Manager
SUBJECT:

Authorize the Town Manager to enter into an Agreement with Consultant Regarding the Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS) Project.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council authorize the Town Manager to enter into an agreement with planning consultant Robert Brown regarding the ODDS project in an amount not to exceed $27,000.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
In order to facilitate the development of housing, several State laws provide that a municipality may only impose “objective” design standards to a housing development project, which is typically defined as 2 or more units. (See, e.g., SB 35 [Gov. Code § 65913.4] and the Housing Accountability Act [Gov. Code § 65589.5].) Currently, the Town’s ability to have input on the design of a qualifying housing development project is limited to existing objective standards such as height and setbacks.

In 2019, the Town was awarded a $160,000 SB2 Grant to work collaboratively with other Marin jurisdictions on the creation of objective design and development standards (ODDS). Opticos Design (Opticos) was selected by the group as the design standards consultant. After public input, Opticos created a broadly-applicable ODDS toolkit for each jurisdiction to customize to suit its needs. After public discussion and input from Town staff, Opticos has provided the Town with a draft customized ODDS toolkit.

Although the Town has a draft toolkit, finalizing the customization and presenting the materials to the public, the Planning Commission, and the Town Council is not complete. The final work product will consist of an ordinance amendment containing the objective standards. With the departure of Planning Director Elise Semonian, the Town will require the assistance of a planning consultant with expertise in the field.

Robert Brown has extensive experience as a planning expert in Marin, is familiar with the ODDS project, and is currently assisting other Marin jurisdiction with their ODDS process. Staff recommends that the Town Council authorize the Town Manager to enter into an agreement with Mr. Brown to consult regarding ODDS in an amount not to exceed $27,000. Staff understands that this amount will be covered by the SB2 Grant. Attached as Exhibit 1, please find Mr. Brown’s proposal for a detailed scope of work. Mr. Brown’s scope of work will include working with Opticos to finalize the Town’s ODDS toolkit, analyzing the ODDS standards for consistency and compatibility with the Town’s current Zoning Code, and making presentations to the public, Planning Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 41
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.5.

Commission, and Town Council.

FISCAL IMPACT
Because the proposed contract would be funded by the Town’s SB2 grant, there are minimal fiscal impacts anticipated. Staff proposes that an additional amount of $3,800 be approved as a contingency budget for the project for a total not to exceed amount of $27,000.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed contract approval is consistent with the General Plan.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed contract approval is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) because it is not a “project’ under CEQA; and CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), the “common sense exemption”, because the proposed contract approval will not have a significant environmental effect.

The proposed contract approval does not implicate the policies of the Climate Action Plan and is therefore not applicable.

CONCLUSION
Staff recommends the Town Council authorize the Town Manager to enter into an agreement with Mr. Brown for work regarding the Town’s Objective Design and Development Standards as discussed above in an amount not to exceed $27,000.

Attachment 1 - Proposed Professional Services Contract
Attachment 1: Exhibit 1 - Proposed Scope of Work
Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 42

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR DEVELOPMENT AND

ADOPTION OF OBJECTIVE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
This Agreement is made and entered into this _____ day of __________________, 2022, by and between the TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO (hereinafter "TOWN"), and Robert Brown, AICP (hereinafter "CONSULTANT").

RECITALS
WHEREAS, to facilitate housing development, several State laws require a municipality to impose only to “objective” design and development standards to qualifying housing development projects; and
WHEREAS, the Town is coordinating with other jurisdictions in the County of Marin and a design and development standards consultant (Opticos) to develop customized objective design and development standards for the Town; and
WHEREAS, the Town desires to retain a planning consultant to coordinate with Opticos and Town staff to prepare and present proposed objective design and development standards to the public, Planning Commission, and Town Council; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is a certified planner with expertise and experience in local planning matters, including experience with the development, implementation, and requirements for objective design and development standards; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT desires to contract with TOWN to render such services upon the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement, and TOWN desires to retain CONSULTANT regarding same.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1. PROJECT COORDINATION.

A. TOWN’S Project Manager. The Town Manager or his designee is hereby designated the PROJECT MANAGER for the TOWN and said PROJECT MANAGER shall supervise all aspects of the progress and execution of this Agreement.

B. CONSULTANT’S Project Director. CONSULTANT shall assign a single PROJECT DIRECTOR to have overall responsibility for the progress and execution of this Agreement for CONSULTANT. Robert Brown is hereby designated as the PROJECT DIRECTOR for CONSULTANT. Should circumstances or conditions subsequent to the execution of this Agreement require a substitute PROJECT DIRECTOR, for any reason, the CONSULTANT shall notify the TOWN within ten (10) business days of the substitution.

ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1 1 ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
43 2. DUTIES OF CONSULTANT.

CONSULTANT shall perform the duties and/or provide services as described in Exhibit A, which hereby incorporated by reference. CONSULTANT shall not employ any other consultants, subconsultants, experts, or contractors without the prior written approval of TOWN.

3. COMPENSATION.

For the full performance of the services described herein by CONSULTANT, TOWN shall pay CONSULTANT the hourly rate of $145, as set forth in Exhibit A, but in no event to exceed $27,000.

Payment will be made monthly upon receipt by PROJECT MANAGER of itemized invoices submitted by CONSULTANT.

4. TERM OF AGREEMENT.

The term of this Agreement shall be for 18 months commencing on the effective date of this Agreement. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, and subject to the approval of the TOWN Manager the term of this Agreement may be extended for an additional period of up to 6 months.

5. TERMINATION.

A. Discretionary. Either party may terminate this Agreement without cause upon thirty (30) days written notice mailed or personally delivered to the other party.

B. Cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement for cause upon fifteen (15) days written notice mailed or personally delivered to the other party, and the notified party's failure to cure or correct the cause of the termination, to the reasonable satisfaction of the party giving such notice, within such fifteen (15) day time period.

C. Effect of Termination. Upon receipt of notice of termination, neither party shall incur additional obligations under any provision of this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other.

D. Return of Documents. Upon termination, any and all TOWN documents or materials provided to CONSULTANT and any and all of CONSULTANT's documents and materials prepared for or relating to the performance of its duties under this Agreement, shall be delivered to TOWN as soon as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days after termination.

6. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS.

The written documents and materials prepared by the CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of its duties under this Agreement, shall be the sole property of TOWN. TOWN may use said property for any purpose, including projects not contemplated by this Agreement.

ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1 2 ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
44 7. INSPECTION AND AUDIT.

Upon reasonable notice, CONSULTANT shall make available to TOWN, or its agent, for inspection and audit, all documents and materials maintained by CONSULTANT in connection with its performance of its duties under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall fully cooperate with TOWN or its agent in any such audit or inspection.

8. ASSIGNABILITY.

The parties agree that they shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of their respective obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of the other party, and any attempt to so assign this Agreement or any rights, duties or obligations arising hereunder shall be void and of no effect.

9. INSURANCE.

A. Scope of Coverage. During the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall maintain, at no expense to TOWN, the following insurance policies:

1. A commercial general liability insurance policy in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence/two million dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate, for death, bodily injury, personal injury, or property damage.

2. An automobile liability (owned, non-owned, and hired vehicles) insurance policy in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) dollars per occurrence.

3. If any licensed professional performs any of the services required to be performed under this Agreement, a professional liability insurance policy in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence/two million dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate, to cover any claims arising out of the CONSULTANT's performance of services under this Agreement.

Where CONSULTANT is a professional not required to have a professional license, TOWN reserves the right to require CONSULTANT to provide professional liability insurance pursuant to this section.

4. If it employs any person, CONSULTANT shall maintain worker's compensation insurance, as required by the State of California, with statutory limits, and employer’s liability insurance with limits of no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. CONSULTANT’s worker’s compensation insurance shall be specifically endorsed to waive any right of subrogation against TOWN.

B. Other Insurance Requirements. The insurance coverage required of the CONSULTANT in subparagraph A of this section above shall also meet the following requirements:

1. Except for professional liability insurance or worker’s compensation insurance, the insurance policies shall be specifically endorsed to include the TOWN, its officers, ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1 3 ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
45 agents, employees, and volunteers, as additional insureds (for both ongoing and completed operations) under the policies.

2. The additional insured coverage under CONSULTANT’S insurance policies shall be “primary and noncontributory” with respect to any insurance or coverage maintained by TOWN and shall not call upon TOWN's insurance or self-insurance coverage for any contribution.

The “primary and noncontributory” coverage in CONSULTANT’S policies shall be at least as broad as ISO form CG20 01 04 13.

3. Except for professional liability insurance or worker’s compensation insurance, the insurance policies shall include, in their text or by endorsement, coverage for contractual liability and personal injury.

4. By execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT hereby grants to TOWN a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of CONSULTANT may acquire against TOWN by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. CONSULTANT agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not TOWN has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

5. If the insurance is written on a Claims Made Form, then, following termination of this Agreement, said insurance coverage shall survive for a period of not less than five years.

6. The insurance policies shall provide for a retroactive date of placement coinciding with the effective date of this Agreement.

7. The limits of insurance required in this Agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and noncontributory basis for the benefit of TOWN (if agreed to in a written contract or agreement) before TOWN’S own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

8. It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to TOWN or any other additional insured party. Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be: (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured; whichever is greater. No representation is made that the minimum Insurance requirements of this agreement are sufficient to cover the obligations of the CONSULTANT under this agreement.

C. Deductibles and SIR’s. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions in CONSULTANT's insurance policies must be declared to and approved by the PROJECT MANAGER and TOWN Attorney and shall not reduce the limits of liability. Policies containing any self-insured retention (SIR) provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named insured or TOWN or other additional insured party. At TOWN's ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1 4 ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
46 option, the deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to TOWN shall be reduced or eliminated to TOWN's satisfaction, or CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration, attorney's fees and defense expenses.

D. Proof of Insurance. CONSULTANT shall provide to the PROJECT MANAGER or TOWN’S TOWN Attorney all of the following: (1) Certificates of Insurance evidencing the insurance coverage required in this Agreement; (2) a copy of the policy declaration page and/or endorsement page listing all policy endorsements for the commercial general liability policy, and (3) excerpts of policy language or specific endorsements evidencing the other insurance requirements set forth in this Agreement. TOWN reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any insurance policy and endorsements from CONSULTANT. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of the right to exercise it later. The insurance shall be approved as to form and sufficiency by PROJECT MANAGER and the Town Attorney.

10. INDEMNIFICATION.

A. Except as otherwise provided in Paragraph B., CONSULTANT shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify, release, defend with counsel approved by TOWN, and hold harmless TOWN, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers (collectively, the “TOWN Indemnitees”), from and against any claim, demand, suit, judgment, loss, liability or expense of any kind, including but not limited to attorney's fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation, (collectively “CLAIMS”), arising out of CONSULTANT’S performance of its obligations or conduct of its operations under this Agreement. The CONSULTANT's obligations apply regardless of whether or not a liability is caused or contributed to by the active or passive negligence of the TOWN Indemnitees. However, to the extent that liability is caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the TOWN Indemnitees, the CONSULTANT's indemnification obligation shall be reduced in proportion to the TOWN Indemnitees’ share of liability for the active negligence or willful misconduct. In addition, the acceptance or approval of the CONSULTANT’s work or work product by the TOWN or any of its directors, officers or employees shall not relieve or reduce the CONSULTANT’s indemnification obligations. In the event the TOWN Indemnitees are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from CONSULTANT’S performance of or operations under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide a defense to the TOWN Indemnitees or at TOWN’S option reimburse the TOWN Indemnitees their costs of defense, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred in defense of such claims.

B. Where the services to be provided by CONSULTANT under this Agreement are design professional services to be performed by a design professional as that term is defined under Civil Code Section 2782.8, then, to the extent permitted by law including without limitation, Civil Code sections 2782, 2782.6 and 2782.8, CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless the TOWN and its officers, officials, and employees (collectively TOWN Indemnitees) from and against damages, liabilities or costs (including incidental damages. Court costs, reasonable attorney’s fees as may be determined by the Court, litigation expenses and fees of expert witnesses incurred in connection therewith and costs of investigation) to the extent they are caused by the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, or any subconsultants, or subcontractor or anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone for whom they are ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1 5 ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
47 legally liable (collectively Liabilities). Such obligation to hold harmless and indemnify any indemnity shall not apply to the extent that such Liabilities are caused in part by the negligence or willful misconduct of such TOWN Indemnitee.

C. The defense and indemnification obligations of this Agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Agreement, and shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.

11. NONDISCRIMINATION.

CONSULTANT shall not discriminate, in any way, against any person on the basis of age, sex, gender identity, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin or disability in connection with or related to the performance of its duties and obligations under this Agreement.

12. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS.

CONSULTANT shall observe and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, codes and regulations, in the performance of its duties and obligations under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall perform all services under this Agreement in accordance with these laws, ordinances, codes and regulations. CONSULTANT shall release, defend, indemnify and hold harmless TOWN, its officers, agents and employees from any and all damages, liabilities, penalties, fines and all other consequences from any noncompliance or violation of any laws, ordinances, codes or regulations.

13. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES.

TOWN and CONSULTANT do not intend, by any provision of this Agreement, to create in any third party, any benefit or right owed by one party, under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, to the other party.

14. NOTICES.

All notices and other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement, including any notice of change of address, shall be in writing and given by personal delivery, or deposited with the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed to the parties intended to be notified. Notice shall be deemed given as of the date of personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the date of deposit with the United States Postal Service. Notice shall be given as follows:

TO TOWN’s Project Manager: David P. Donery, Town Manager 525 San Anselmo Ave.

San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO CONSULTANT’s Project Director: Robert Brown
17 Rebelo Ln.

Novato, CA 94949
ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
6 ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
48 15. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.

For the purposes, and for the duration, of this Agreement, CONSULTANT, its officers, agents and employees shall act in the capacity of an Independent Contractor, and not as employees of the TOWN. CONSULTANT and TOWN expressly intend and agree that the status of CONSULTANT, its officers, agents and employees be that of an Independent Contractor and not that of an employee of TOWN.

16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT -- AMENDMENTS.

A. The terms and conditions of this Agreement, all exhibits attached, and all documents expressly incorporated by reference, represent the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement.

B. This written Agreement shall supersede any and all prior agreements, oral or written, regarding the subject matter between the CONSULTANT and the TOWN.

C. No other agreement, promise or statement, written or oral, relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, shall be valid or binding, except by way of a written amendment to this Agreement.

D. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not be altered or modified except by a written amendment to this Agreement signed by the CONSULTANT and the TOWN.

E. If any conflicts arise between the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and the terms and conditions of the attached exhibits or the documents expressly incorporated by reference, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control.

17. SET-OFF AGAINST DEBTS.

CONSULTANT agrees that TOWN may deduct from any payment due to CONSULTANT under this Agreement, any monies which CONSULTANT owes TOWN under any ordinance, agreement, contract or resolution for any unpaid taxes, fees, licenses, assessments, unpaid checks or other amounts.

18. WAIVERS.

The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement, or of any ordinance, law or regulation, shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, ordinance, law or regulation, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or other term, covenant, condition, ordinance, law or regulation. The subsequent acceptance by either party of any fee, performance, or other consideration which may become due or owing under this Agreement, shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding breach or violation by the other party of any term, condition, covenant of this Agreement or any applicable law, ordinance or regulation.

ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
7 ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
49 19. TOWN BUSINESS LICENSE / OTHER TAXES.

CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain during the duration of this Agreement, a TOWN business license as required by the San Anselmo Municipal Code CONSULTANT shall pay any and all state and federal taxes and any other applicable taxes. TOWN shall not be required to pay for any work performed under this Agreement, until CONSULTANT has provided TOWN with a completed Internal Revenue Service Form W-9 (Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification).

20. SURVIVAL OF TERMS.

Any terms of this Agreement that by their nature extend beyond the term (or termination) of this Agreement shall remain in effect until fulfilled and shall apply to both Parties’ respective successors and assigns.

21. APPLICABLE LAW.

The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.

22. COUNTERPARTS AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE.

This Agreement may be executed by electronic signature and in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one document.

Counterpart signature pages may be delivered by telecopier, email or other means of electronic transmission.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day, month and year first above written.

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO CONSULTANT
______________________________ ______________________________ DAVID P. DONERY, Town Manager Robert Brown, AICP

ATTEST:
______________________________
CARLA KACMAR, Town Clerk

ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
8 ITEM 2.5 - ATTACHMENT 1
50 PROPOSAL TO THE CITY OF SAN ANSELMO FOR ADOPTION OF

OBJECTIVE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Description of Tasks

DOCUMENT PREPARATION
Task 1: Evaluate Current Regulations and Draft ODDS. Review the City’s current development regulations and compare with the Draft Objective and Design Standards (ODDS) prepared by Opticos Design, Inc. Identify differences, including proposed new standards for sloped lots.

Deliverables: Comparison of existing zoning vs. draft ODDS.

Task 2: Review Results of Site Testing and Evaluate Applicability to Potential Housing Opportunity Sites. Review the draft list of potential housing opportunity sites being prepared for the Housing Element update and compare with likely development potential and building scale under the draft ODDS as demonstrated by the prior site testing performed by Opticos.

Perform site visits as necessary. Identify potential conflicts or need to adjust ODDS standards or proposed zones.

Task 3: Determine Applicability of ODDS to Building Remodels and Additions and to Density Bonus Concessions and Waivers. Work with City legal staff to determine how best to apply the ODDS to remodels/reuse or expansion of existing buildings and how the draft ODDS applies to requests for waivers or concessions under the state density bonus provisions.

Task 4: Coordinate Preparation of Administrative Draft ODDS. Work with Opticos and City staff to revise the last draft of the ODDS into a final Administrative Draft for public review.

Task 5: Coordinate Preparation of Final Draft ODDS. Work with Opticos and City staff to review the Administrative Draft ODDS into a Final Draft for adoption based on public input and direction from the Planning Commission following the public workshop in Task 8.

OUTREACH
Task 6: Conduct Focus Group Discussion with Local Architects. Convene a focus group of local architects and, along with a representative of Opticos, facilitate a discussion of the Draft ODDS to receive feedback. Meeting will be held virtually. Deliverables: PowerPoint presentation; summary of comments.

Task 7: Conduct Focus Group Discussions with Planning Commission Subcommittee.

Facilitate a discussion of the Draft ODDS with a 2-member subcommittee of the Planning Commission to evaluate the Draft ODDS and receive feedback. Two meetings will be held virtually. Deliverables: PowerPoint presentation; summary of comments.

ITEM 2.5 - EXHIBIT A to ATTACHMENT 1 ITEM 2.5 - EXHIBIT A to ATTACHMENT 1 1 51 Task 8: Hold Planning Commission Workshop. Conduct a public workshop at a Planning Commission meeting. Facilitate a discussion to obtain feedback. Assumes attendance by an Opticos representative. Deliverables: PowerPoint presentation.

ADOPTION
Task 9: Prepare Draft Planning Commission Staff Report. Prepare a draft staff report for review by City staff. Deliverable: Draft staff report in City format.

Task 10: Draft and Publish Planning Commission Hearing Notice. Work with City staff to publish a public hearing notice.

Task 11: Planning Commission Meeting. Attend a Planning Commission meeting. Participate in the presentation, along with Opticos’ representative. Deliverable: PowerPoint presentation.

Task 12: Prepare Draft City Council Staff Report. Prepare draft staff report for review by City staff. Deliverable: Draft staff report in City format.

Task 13: Draft and Publish City Council Hearing Notice. Work with City staff to publish a public hearing notice.

Task 14: City Council Meeting – ordinance introduction. Attend a City Council meeting and provide a presentation of the draft ODDS for adoption. Deliverable: PowerPoint presentation.

Task 15: City Council Meeting – ordinance adoption. Attend City Council meeting to respond to questions as required.

Time and Budget Estimate
Hourly rate, including travel time: $145
Tasks Est. Hours
Task 1: Evaluate Current Regulations and ODDS 20
Task 2: Review Site Testing 8
Task 3: Determine Applicability of ODDS 2
Task 4: Prepare Administrative Draft ODDS 65
Task 5: Prepare Final Administrative Draft ODDS 15
Task 6: Focus Group with Local Architects 6
Task 7: Focus Group Meetings with Planning Commission Subcommittee 10 Task 8: Planning Commission Workshop 8
Task 9: Prepare Planning Commission Staff Report 6
Task 10: Planning Commission Hearing Notice 1
ITEM 2.5 - EXHIBIT A to ATTACHMENT 1 ITEM 2.5 - EXHIBIT A to ATTACHMENT 1 2 52 Tasks Est. Hours
Task 11: Planning Commission Meeting 7
Task 12: Prepare City Council Staff Report 4
Task 13: City Council Hearing Notice 1
Task 14: City Council Meeting (ordinance introduction) 6 Task 15: City Council Meeting (ordinance adoption) 1
TOTAL EST. HOURS 160
TOTAL EST. BUDGET (@$145/hour) $23,200
Note: Additional public outreach, meetings or tasks as directed will be billed at hourly rate.

ITEM 2.5 - EXHIBIT A to ATTACHMENT 1 ITEM 2.5 - EXHIBIT A to ATTACHMENT 1 3 53 Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.6.

FROM:

Mattie O’Grady, Recreation Supervisor
SUBJECT:

Special Event Application: Hope on the Rize

RECOMMENDATION
That Council approve the Children for Change and Pseads’ application for the Hope on the Rize event scheduled for May 1st ,2022 from 10:30 am-1:00 pm.

BACKGROUND
This event is sponsored by the Children for Change and Pseads, and their goal is to encourage young people to use art (both film and visual arts) to demonstrate the importance of care for the community.

DISCUSSION
This event is projected to attract approximately 50-100 people from the Ross Valley area. They are requesting the use of Imagination Park and plan on having a variety of the following activities: making of hope flags, painting with Michael Feldman, May Day baskets of good will to be delivered around town, film workshops, and a DJ. The applicant is responsible for set-up, clean-up, and all event logistics. There is no street closure associated with this event.

The attached application provides details of the event with comments and conditions from Town staff.

FISCAL IMPACT
There would be no direct fiscal impact to the Town to approve this item.

CONCLUSION
That Council approve the Children for Change and Pseads’ application for the Hope on the Rize event scheduled for May 1st ,2022 from 10:30 am-1:00 pm.

Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 54
55 56
57 58
Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.7.

FROM:

Mattie O’Grady, Recreation Supervisor
SUBJECT:

Chamber of Commerce’s ‘San Anselmo Live on the Avenue’ June Extension Event Application.

RECOMMENDATION
That Town Council:

1. Approve the Chamber of Commerce’s extension of the ‘San Anselmo Live on the Avenue’ music series, Attachment 1, scheduled for Fridays and Saturdays from June 3, 2022, through June 25, 2022, from 6:00pm to 8:00/9:00pm.

2. Approve closing San Anselmo Avenue Friday and Saturday evenings, June 3, 2022, through June 25, 2022, from 6:00pm to 10:00pm.

BACKGROUND
On June 9, 2020, the Town Council approved an urgency ordinance and resolution authorizing the Town Manager to allow temporary outdoor activities, encroachment agreements for outdoor dining areas, other outdoor uses for businesses, street closures for outdoor events, and the temporary suspension certain fees.

With the approval of the ordinance and resolution staff created the “On the Avenue” program which closed parts of San Anselmo Avenue Friday night through Sunday. However, based on feedback from merchants, this was revised to limit closures to Friday and Saturday evenings.

On May 25, 2021, Council approved the ‘On the Avenue’ music series and street closures for summer 2021.

San Anselmo Avenue was closed from Tunstead Avenue to Tamalpais Avenue Friday nights from 6:00pm to 10:30pm and Saturday nights from 5:00pm to 10:30pm.

The Recreation Department booked bands during August and September and the community responded by filling the downtown area every weekend. Families played on the avenue, people strolled down the vehicle free Avenue and enjoyed the local eateries. Visitors danced to the music and visited businesses that remained open for the festivities. The concerts provided people the chance to enjoy our Town under the beautiful summer night skies and to bring back some much-needed vitality and vibrance to San Anselmo. As a result of the popularity of these events, ‘On the avenue ‘was extended through the month of October.

On April 12, 2022, Council approved the ‘San Anselmo Live On the Avenue’ music series and street closures for the summer of 2022. Music was approved for Friday and Saturday evenings July through October from 6:00- 9:00pm and the street closures were approved from 6:00-10:00pm (with a soft closure to in-bound traffic Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 59
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.7.
starting at 5:30pm).

DISCUSSION
The Chamber of Commerce submitted an event application to extend the already approved series into the month of June, which would be an additional 8 nights of live music.

The Chamber would independently book bands for Creek Park and Town Hall Plaza with most entertainment occurring between 6:00 - 9:00 pm. And in order to be consistent with the July through October series, the Chamber is recommending that San Anselmo Avenue have a soft closure at 5:30 pm and a hard closure at 6:00 pm. A soft closure means that parking would still be available but no inbound traffic would be allowed in. A hard closure means both inbound and outbound traffic would be stopped, and no parking would be allowed at 6:00 pm. The Chamber would also be independently responsible for street closures. This includes coordinating with CMPA and paying for a cadet to assist with the removal of cars from the Avenue. Finally, the Chamber would be independently responsible for maintaining and restocking restroom facilities. This responsibility may be assumed by the Chamber or they can work with the Town’s contracted cleaning service and pay $100 per evening. Town staff and the Chamber of Commerce will work together to maintain consistency and uniformity among the concert series and communications to the public.

The Town has ensured that the 30-minute parking spaces on Fridays and Saturdays from 4:30-6:00 pm will be made available in June to help with customer parking. These designated parking areas are in the Town Hall parking lot (3 closest to Magnolia Avenue), the Creek Park lot (3 spaces closest to the Redwood Grove), and the Creek Park lot (3 spaces closest to the Coffee Roaster’s Bridge). All the spaces will be clearly marked.

The closure of the street creates a good opportunity to add additional offerings from the Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber of Commerce has been invited to add merchant activities beyond their storefronts, including entertainment and attractions. Any organized events would require an additional special event application and review by the Town Council.

FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no fiscal impact on the Town as during the month of June all expenses regarding band stipends, street closures, CMPA cadet time, and bathroom restocking and maintenance will be provided by and coordinated by the Chamber of Commerce.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
Approving the June 2022 extension of ‘Live on the Avenue’ event series is not considered a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), because it does not involve an activity which has the potential to cause a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (Cal. Pub.

Res. Code § 21065). If measure D moves forward and passes, all projects that come forward will be looked at for CEQA compliance and Climate Action Plan consistency.

Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 60
61 62
63 NAME OF EVENT: Live on The Avenue June Extension DATE OF EVENT: June 2022

DEPARTMENT COMMENTS/CONDITIONS APPROVED BY
POLICE M. Norton
FIRE Requests that all barricades must be moveable by a person.

J. Weber
RECREATION Applicant must notify all businesses on the Avenue impacted by June extension of street closure.

D. Mauk
PUBLIC WORKS Applicant must maintain and re-stock bathroom facilities or coordinate with and independently pay
the Town’s contract cleaning service.

S. Condry &
A. Shaw
ADMINISTRATION Applicant must coordinate assistance with CMPA and independently pay for a cadet to assist with the
removal of cars from the Avenue.

D. Donery

TOWN COUNCIL
64 Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.8.

FROM:

Scott Schneider, Assistant Public Works Director
SUBJECT:

Accept Brookside Elementary School Sidewalk Gap Closure project

RECOMMENDATION
That the Town Council accept the Brookside Elementary School Sidewalk Gap Closure Project and authorize staff to file a Notice of Completion.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
On June 8, 2021, Town Council approved the construction contract for the installation of sidewalk, curb ramps, and crosswalk improvements on along Sir Francis Drake Blvd, from the bus stop near Butterfield Road, across Suffield Avenue, to 1588 Sir Francis Drake Blvd.

The Engineer’s Estimate for the project was $320,000. The project was awarded to Bauman Landscape and Construction, Inc. in the amount of $277,611. The work that was completed was substantially in accordance with the project plans and specifications and was fully available for public use on March 15, 2022.

The final construction cost was $336,605.19, which included extra work to add a sidewalk backing curb, driveway conform adjustments among other miscellaneous items.

FISCAL IMPACT
Funding came from the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) grant in the amount of $350,000 which includes $49,028.22 for design and environmental studies, and $300,971.78 for construction and construction management.

Funding for the remaining construction balance of $35,633.41 is available in the Measure D Fund (local match was budgeted at $90,000).

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
This project is consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, Objective 6: Continue to maintain and expand the pedestrian way system.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 65
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.8.

The Town finds this project to be categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1, because it involves maintenance of existing streets, will not create additional automobile lanes and involves negligible or no expansion of use. (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15301). None of the exceptions to this Class 1 categorical exemption apply in this instance (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15300.2). Specifically, successive projects of the same type in the same location will not cause significant cumulative impacts, as there are no successive projects planned at this time. There are no unusual circumstances presented by this project and the project will not result in damage to scenic resources within a designated state scenic highway. Finally, the project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, as no historical resources will be impacted.

The sidewalk gap closure project is included in the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, and addresses Climate Action Plan 2030 Transportation Measures T-3 Walking and T-4 Safe Routes to School.

Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 66
Recording requested by, and
When recorded mail to:

The Town of San Anselmo
Public Works Department
525 San Anselmo Avenue San
Anselmo, CA 94960
For the benefit of
Town of San Anselmo
A Municipal Corporation

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:

1. That on the 26th day of April 2022, the Public Works Project known as:

Brookside Elementary School Sidewalk Gap Closure Project, was accepted by the Town Council as complete.

2. That the name and address of the agency/owner filing this Notice is:
the TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO, 525 SAN ANSELMO AVENUE, CA 94960.

3. That the nature of the interest is Public Right of Way.

4. That the name and address of the contractor responsible for the construction of said public project is:

Bauman Landscape and Construction, Inc., 2920 Lyon St, San Francisco, CA 94123.

5. That the name and address of said contractors’ surety is:

Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company, 1 Bala Plaza Suite 100, Bala Cynwyd, PA 94004.

6. That the general description of the public project was:

The work to be performed under this Contract consists of, but is not limited to: clearing and grubbing, pavement removal, construction of curb, gutter, sidewalk and driveway concrete, drainage work, hot mix asphalt paving, utility adjustments, pavement delineation and signage, traffic control, water pollution control and ancillary work on Sir Francis Drake Boulevard as shown on the project plans.

7. That said public project was completed on March 15, 2022 in accordance with the plans and specifications as required by the Town of San Anselmo.

I, THE UNDERSIGNED, have read and understand this Notice and know its contents. I declare under penalty of perjury that the facts stated herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
By__________________________
Sean Condry, Public Works Director
EXECUTED AT San Anselmo, California on the 26th day of April 2022.

ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Carla Kacmar, Town Clerk
67 Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 2.9.

FROM:

Carla Kacmar, Town Clerk
SUBJECT:

Appoint applicants to the Climate Action Committee

RECOMMENDATION
Appoint applicants to the Climate Action Committee.

BACKGROUND
The Climate Action Committee has a membership of seven seats. There are three seats available. Christiana Conser and Judith O’Rourke have applied. They have been interviewed and their applications are attached to this report.

FISCAL IMPACT
There would be no direct fiscal impact to the Town to approve this item.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed decision is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), under the “common sense” exemption, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant negative effect on the environment. (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15061).

Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 68
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 1
Board, Committee,
Commission
(total seats)
Seats
Expiring/
Vacant
Applicants Term
(Yrs)1
Date of
Interview
Arts Commission
7 seats + youth Dannielle Mauk
(Temporary Expansion to 8 seats)
3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee
7 seats Sean Condry
4 Board of Review
5 seats Jeff Zuba
2 6
Capital Programs
Monitoring Committee
7 seats Sean Condry
3 4
Economic Development Committee
7 seats Elise Semonian
3 Financial Advisory Committee
5 seats Jeff Zuba
(Temporary Expansion to 6 seats)
1 Kfir Lindheim 3
Flood Committee
7 seats Sean Condry
2 4
Historical Commission
11 seats+ youth Linda Kenton
4 Library Advisory Board
7 seats+ youth Linda Kenton
4 Library Tax Oversight Committee
5 seats Linda Kenton
3 Marin Commission On Aging
1 seat
3 Mosquito Abatement District
1 seat
2-4
Open Space Committee
11 seats + youth Elise Semonian
4 Parks & Recreation Commission
7 seats + youth Dannielle Mauk
1 4
Planning Commission
7 seats Elise Semonian
1 Kim Pipkin
Peter Thomas Strauss
4 Racial Equity Ad Hoc Committee 1
Climate Action Commission
7 seats+ youth Elise Semonian
3 Christiana Conser
Judith O’Rourke
3 Ross Valley Paramedic Authority
1 seat
4 Tax Equity Board
3 seats Jeff Zuba
1 3
* Incumbent
1 Per Commission Guidelines, differing term lengths may be allowed to accomplish a staggering of the appointment schedule.
69 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
70 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
71 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
72 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
73 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
74 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
75 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
76 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 2
77 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
78 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
79 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
80 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
81 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
82 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
83 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
84 ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM 2.9 – ATTACHMENT 3
85 Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 5.

FROM:

Sean Youra
SUBJECT:

Climate Action Update

RECOMMENDATION
Review the Climate Action Update report.

BACKGROUND
At its June 11, 2019 meeting, Town Council adopted Resolution 4286 to adopt the San Anselmo Climate Action Plan 2030.

At its February 11, 2020 meeting, Town Council adopted Resolution 4235 declaring a climate and ecological emergency in San Anselmo, which stipulated that staff earmark specific funds for greenhouse gas (GHG) and climate change mitigation for the fiscal year 2020-2021 and all subsequent years in which atmospheric carbon and carbon equivalents are in excess of 350 parts per million.

At its June 22, 2021 meeting, Town Council adopted Resolution 4395 to adopt the 2021-2022 budget and workplan including $55,000 allocated to the Climate Action Fund. The Towns of Fairfax and San Anselmo hired a Climate Action Coordinator through an Interagency Agreement signed in February 2022 to primarily work with Town departments to implement and operationalize the Climate Action Plan (CAP), and develop programs to support community adoption of climate actions. Some of the funds from the Climate Action Fund are being used to pay half of the salary for the staff position.

DISCUSSION
Since starting on February 14, 2022, the Climate Action Coordinator has been working on several items to understand where the Town is at in terms of CAP implementation and is currently supporting the implementation of some of the measures in the CAP. These items include:
· Promoting the Ride and Drive Clean Marin Campaign through the Town’s newsletter, social media, and website (Identified CAP action under Measure T-1: Zero Emission Vehicles). The campaign’s purpose is to educate the public about electric vehicles (EVs) and E-bikes through webinars and EV/E-bike shows with the goal of increasing EV adoption.
· Working with R3 Consulting Group and Marin Sanitary Service on SB 1383 implementation and enforcement. This includes developing outreach materials for local businesses and completing Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 3 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 86
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 5.
compliance reports required by CalRecycle (Identified CAP action under Measure W-1: Commercial Organic Waste, and Measure W-4: Mandatory Waste Diversion). · Developing a CAP prioritization strategy that: 1) incorporates measures from the CAP that can achieve the greatest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions; 2) incorporates Climate Action Commission (CAC), Town Council, and community priorities; and 3) incorporates available funding, technical feasibility, resiliency potential, and other considerations for proposed actions (Identified CAP action under Measure O-2: Community Engagement, and Measure I-1: Annual Monitoring). · Developing a climate action funding spreadsheet to identify funding opportunities for measures in the CAP and track any associated deadlines to ensure these opportunities aren’t missed (Identified CAP action under Measure I-3: Identify and Secure Funding Sources). · Participating in the development of the Marin Countywide Electric Vehicle Acceleration Strategy with other Marin Climate & Energy Partnership (MCEP) partners and members of the EV Subcommittee that will help jurisdictions overcome barriers to EV adoption (including E-bikes) and support implementation of local CAP goals related to EVs (Identified CAP action under Measure T-1: Zero Emission Vehicles, Measure T-2: Bicycling, and Measure T-11: Zero and Low Emission Town Vehicles). · Participating in the Green Building Steering Committee to assist with outreach and engagement regarding 2022 cross-jurisdictional reach code development and implementation (Identified CAP action under Measure E-4: Green Building Reach Code).

To further support implementation of the CAP, the Climate Action Coordinator will:
· Develop a fleet electrification policy and strategy in coordination with staff and CAC members (Identified CAP action under Measure T-11: Zero and Low Emission Town Vehicles). · Identify what actions have been taken that relate to measures in the CAP and the relative percentage completion of each measure. This will provide a baseline of where the Town is at with CAP implementation and help inform what additional actions should be taken to achieve the GHG emissions reduction goals in the CAP. Will also review climate adaptation strategies already implemented and determine where vulnerabilities still exist to help inform what additional adaptation strategies may be needed (Identified CAP action under Measure I-1: Annual Monitoring, and Measure A-1: Preparation and Response).
· Collaborate with the CAC to prioritize and finalize their proposed climate action projects for 2022-23. · Continue to work with R3 Consulting Group and Marin Sanitary Service on SB 1383 implementation and enforcement including informational sessions with Town staff. Will also work with R3 on implementation and enforcement of the Single-Use Foodware Ordinance (Identified CAP action under Measure W-9: Waste from Town Operations, and Measure W-7: Inorganic Waste). · Continue to identify funding opportunities for climate action and sources of revenue for the Climate Action Fund.
· Collaborate with MCEP and the CAC on CAP implementation and updates (Identified CAP action under Measure I-4: Update the Climate Action Plan).
· Collaborate with the Green Building Steering Committee, CAC, and staff to develop updated building and energy reach codes that help decarbonize and electrify buildings, and engage the community in these efforts (Identified CAP action under Measure R-3: Building and Appliance Electrification, Measure E-4: Green Building Reach Code, and Measure O-2: Community Engagement). · Collaborate with consultants, staff, and the CAC on ensuring Town facilities are sustainable (e.g., electrify appliances, install solar) and resilient (e.g., battery backup with microgrid services) in the face Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 3 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 87
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 5.
of worsening climate impacts and can provide critical services during times of emergency (Identified CAP action under Measure R-1: Renewable Energy Generation, Measure R-3: Building and Appliance Electrification, Measure R-4: Innovative Technologies, Measure R-5: Solar Energy Systems for Municipal Buildings, and Measure A-1: Preparation and Response).
· Collaborate with the CAC and Town staff on policy research and community outreach regarding gas station warning labels and prohibiting new gas stations from being built within Town limits. Will also work on additional policy research and community outreach regarding expanding the scope of Ordinance No. 1157 (banning the use of gas-powered leaf blowers) to include all gas-powered landscape equipment (Identified CAP action under Measure T-10: Electric Landscape Equipment). · Provide updates to the Town Manager, CAC, and Town Council on climate action progress. Will also work on providing updates and educational climate action information to the community via the Town newsletter, website, and social media, as well as engaging the community through surveys and other means to understand their priorities and concerns for proposed climate mitigation and adaptation measures (Identified CAP action under Measure O-1: Community Education, and Measure O-2:

Community Engagement.

ANALYSIS
N/A

FISCAL IMPACT
Staff time.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
N/A

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
N/A

CONCLUSION
The Climate Action Coordinator is already supporting the implementation of several measures in the CAP and working with the CAC, staff, regional partners, and consultants to make further progress in achieving the Town’s GHG emissions reduction goals. The Climate Action Coordinator will continue to provide quarterly updates to the Town Council on CAP implementation progress.

Town of San Anselmo Page 3 of 3 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 88
Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 7.

FROM:

Jeff Zuba, Finance & Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:

Amending the Master Fee Schedule of the Town of San Anselmo

RECOMMENDATION
That Council conduct a public hearing and adopt the attached Resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule to reflect cost increases based on the annual change in the Consumer Price Index

BACKGROUND
On December 11, 2018, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 4258 to approve The Town of San Anselmo User Fee Study Report by Willdan Financial Services, dated October 2018 (“Fee Study”) and to adopt the updated Town of San Anselmo User Fee Schedule. (See Fee Study attached as Attachment 2). Resolution No. 4258 directed the Town Manager or his designee to conduct an annual internal review of the Master Fee Schedule and to permit the automatic adjustment of fees based on the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, California (“CPI”).Under the resolution and state law, the Town Council must review and approve the annual automatic adjustment by resolution.

As required in Resolution No. 4258, the Town Manager and Town Finance & Administrative Services Director have conducted an annual internal review of the User Fee Schedule and prepared a revised fee schedule to reflect the automatically adjusted schedule of user and regulatory fees, based on the CPI. On May 12, 2020, the Town Council adopted an amended fee schedule with a 2.5% increase in CPI for the period from December 2018 to December 2019. On April 27, 2021, the Town Council adopted an amended fee schedule with a 2.0% increase in the CPI for the period December 2019 to December 2020. This year marks the third annual adjustment. The amended fee schedule in the attached Resolution reflects the 4.2% increase in CPI for the period from December 2020 to December 2021. Following review and approval by the Council, the amended fee schedule will become effective on July 1, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT
Assuming fee-related activity remains relatively stable, the proposed fee changes are anticipated to generate roughly $50,000 in additional annual revenues.

It is important to note that while adjusting fees will provide a fiscal impact in the form of additional revenue, the revenue is not intended to be used to fund new services. Rather the revenue is intended to offset the Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 89
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 7.
costs of providing existing services that are recoverable from fees. Consequently, while fees may rise annually, typically labor and service costs (the primary drivers of fee-related costs) also rise annually. Recalibration of these fees simply provides an offset of existing expenditures/needs rather than a source of funding for expanded service levels.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
Adoption of the attached Resolution is statutorily and categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Public Resources Code section 21080(b)(8) and CEQA Guidelines section 15273, because it involves approval of charges by the Town which the Town finds are for the purpose of meeting operating expenses, as demonstrated by the Fee Study completed in October 2018 (Attachment 2).

CONCLUSION
Town staff recommends that the Town Council approve the attached Resolution amending the fee schedule for the Town of San Anselmo. Approving the resolution will establish updated fees effective July 1, 2022 and authorize periodic adjustments to fees based on the annual change in the CPI.

Attachment 1 - Resolution Amending Fee Schedule
Exhibit A - Fee Schedule FY2022-2023
Attachment 2 - Comprehensive Fee Study (October 2018)
Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™ 90
RESOLUTION NO. ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO

AMENDING CERTAIN USER FEES FOR TOWN SERVICES
WHEREAS, state law permits the Town to impose service fees for certain Town services, as long as those fees do not exceed the estimated reasonable costs of providing the service for which the fee is intended; and
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2018, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 4258 to approve The Town of San Anselmo User Fee Study Report by Willdan Financial Services, dated October 2018 (“Fee Study”) and to adopt the Town of San Anselmo User Fee Schedule; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4258 directed the Town Manager or his designee to conduct an annual internal review of the Master Fee Schedule and to permit the automatic adjustment of various fees based on the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, California (“CPI”); and
WHEREAS, the Town Manager and Town Finance & Administrative Services Director conducted the annual internal review of the User Fee Schedule and calculated the adjustment to the fees based on the CPI, as reflected in Exhibit “A” to this Resolution; WHEREAS, the Town has followed all notice and hearing requirements set forth in state law for considering an adjustment to these fees.

NOW THEREFORE, the Town Council of the Town of San Anselmo hereby resolves as follows:

Section 1. Environmental Review
The charges authorized by this resolution are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”), because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity authorized herein may have a significant effect on the environment. (CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3)). More specifically, adopting the resolution is statutorily and categorically exempt from CEQA under Public Resources Code section 21080(b)(8) and CEQA Guidelines section 15273, because it involves approval of charges by the Town which the Town Council finds are for the purpose of meeting operating expenses, as demonstrated by the Fee Study approved by the Town Council on December 11, 2018, in Resolution No. 4258.

Section 2. Adoption of Amended Master Fee Schedule
The Town Council hereby adopts the amended Town of San Anselmo Schedule of User Fees attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference (“Master Fee Schedule”).

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 1 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 1
91 Unless otherwise specified in the Master Fee Schedule, all user fees shall be paid to the Town prior to the Town’s performance of requested services. Pursuant to Resolution No. 4197, fees may be paid by credit card, debit card or electronic fund transfer.

Section 3. Effective Date of Fees
The fees listed on the Master Fee Schedule at Exhibit A will take effect on July 1, 2022.

The Master Fee Schedule at Exhibit A will replace the Town’s existing Master Fee Schedule adopted by Resolution No. 4380.

Section 4. Severability
The Town Council hereby declares every section, paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this Resolution is severable. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution is for any reason found to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity, or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases.

The foregoing Resolution was adopted at the regular meeting of the San Anselmo Town Council held on April 26, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Alexis Fineman, Mayor
ATTEST:

Carla Kacmar, Town Clerk
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 1
92 Schedule of User Fees
Effective July 1, 2022
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT
A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A 1
93 Table of Contents

1. Finance & Administrative Fees 3 - 5

2. Public Works Fees 6 - 9

3. Library Fees 10

4. Building Fees 11 - 15

5. Planning Fees 16 - 19

6. Recreation Fees 20 - 21

7. Police Fees 22 - 23

8. Fully Burdened Hourly Rate 24
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
2 94
Finance & Administration
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
1 Photocopies $0.20 $0.20 Per page Fee Document with State requirements are charged per State Mandate
2 Returned check charge $25.00 $25.00 Per incident Regulated 3 Certification $20.00 $20.00 Per Fee
4 Appeals - Planning Applicant $2,614.00 $2,724.00 Per appeal Fee Town Attorney costs will be passed
on directly to applicant as incurred
and the Town may request a deposit
to cover the cost of anticipated town
attorney time
5 Appeals - Non-Applicant $837.00 $873.00 Per appeal Fee Town Attorney costs will be passed
on directly to applicant as incurred
and the Town may request a deposit
to cover the cost of anticipated town
attorney time
6 Proof of Residency/Living Certification $15.00 $15.00 Per request Fee 7 Business License Fees:
8 Transfer Fee $20.00 $20.00 Per transfer Fee
9 Business License Penalty 10% 10% Per month Penalty Max. 50% 10 Duplicate Business License $15.00 $15.00 Per copy Fee 11 Gross receipts:
12 $0 - $7,500 $15.00 $15.00 Tax
13 $7,501 - $15,000 $30.00 $30.00 Tax
14 $15,001 - $25,000 $45.00 $45.00 Tax
15 $25,001 - $50,000 $60.00 $60.00 Tax
16 $50,001 - $100,000 $100.00 $100.00 Tax
17 $100,001 - $250,000 $150.00 $150.00 Tax
18 $250,001 - $500,000 $300.00 $300.00 Tax
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
3 95
Finance & Administration
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
19 $500,001 - $750,000 $450.00 $450.00 Tax
20 $750,001 - $1,000,000 $600.00 $600.00 Tax
21 $1,000,001 - $2,000,000 $800.00 $800.00 Tax
22 $2,000,001 - $3,000,000 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 Tax
23 $3,000,001 - $4,000,000 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Tax
24 $4,000,001 - $5,000,000 $2,100.00 $2,100.00 Tax
25 $5,000,001 - $10,000,000 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Tax
26 $10,000,001 - $25,000,000 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 Tax
27 $25,000,000 - and over $4500 + .01% $4500 + .01% Tax 28 Hotels/Motels/Inns $17.00 $17.00 Per unit Tax
29 Rental of one or more dwelling units or guest rooms within a rooming house, boarding house, single family dwelling,
apartment, condominium, houseboat, or other residential structure containing guest rooms or dwelling units
$17.00 $17.00 Per unit Tax
30 General contractors and subcontractors $30.00 $30.00 Per quarter Tax 31 General contractors and subcontractors $100.00 $100.00 Per year Tax 32 Auctioneers $50.00 $50.00 Per day Tax
33 Peddlers, solicitors $25.00 $25.00 Per day Tax
34 Peddlers, solicitors $150.00 $150.00 Per quarter Tax 35 Peddlers, solicitors $500.00 $500.00 Per year Tax
36 Circuses or carnivals $400.00 $400.00 First day Tax
37 Circuses or carnivals $300.00 $300.00 Per additional day Tax
38 Commercial & still film permits (public property) : 1-3 $100.00 $100.00 Per day Tax 39 Commercial & still film permits (public property) : 4-6 $200.00 $200.00 Per day Tax 40 Commercial & still film permits (public property) : 7-9 $300.00 $300.00 Per day Tax 41 Commercial & still film permits (public property) : 10 + $400.00 $400.00 Per day Tax 42 Commercial & still film permits (private property): 1-3 $50.00 $50.00 Per day Tax 43 Commercial & still film permits (private property): 4-6 $100.00 $100.00 Per day Tax 44 Commercial & still film permits (private property): 7-9 $150.00 $150.00 Per day Tax 45 Commercial & still film permits (private property): 10+ $200.00 $200.00 Per day Tax 46 Taxicabs $60.00 $60.00 Per vehicle Tax
47 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - less than 1/2 ton capacity $22.50 $22.50 Per vehicle Tax 48 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - not exceeding 1 ton capacity $37.50 $37.50 Per vehicle Tax ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
4 96
Finance & Administration
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
49 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - not exceeding 1-1/2 ton $75.00 $75.00 Per vehicle Tax 50 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - not exceeding 2 ton capacity $112.50 $112.50 Per vehicle Tax 51 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - not exceeding 3 ton capacity $150.00 $150.00 Per vehicle Tax 52 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - over 3 ton capacity $225.00 $225.00 Per vehicle Tax 53 Christmas tree lots $45.00 $45.00 Per year Tax
54 Commercial leased property $0.02 $0.02 Per sq ft. Tax $50 minimum, $220 Maximum 55 Business located out of San Anselmo but use San Anselmo P.O. Box for business $50.00 $50.00 Per year Tax
56 Real estate broker in San Anselmo $100.00 $100.00 Per year Tax Plus $10 per desk 57 Real estate broker in San Anselmo $10.00 $10.00 Per desk Tax 58 Real estate broker out of San Anselmo $150.00 $150.00 Per year Tax 59 Omnibus (all other categories) $50.00 $50.00 Per year Tax 60 Business License List $1.00 $1.00 Per page Tax
60 Tobacco Retailer License $50.00 $50.00 Per year Fee
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
5 97
Public Works
Miscellaneous Items
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
1 Road Impact Fee 1.5% value of project 1.5% value of
project Percentage Fee
2 Tree Removal Fees:
3 Heritage Tree &/or Undeveloped Parcel Tree $251 for 1st hour and hourly rate thereafter
$256 for 1st hour
and hourly rate
thereafter
Per permit Fee
For dead, dying or dangerous trees fee may be
waived. Replacement trees may required for each
tree removed.
4 Street Tree $123.00 $129.00 Per permit Fee This is the cost for both removal and planting of street trees
5 After the fact - Tree or Heritage Tree Removal Fine $2,050.00 $2,137.00 Per tree Penalty $2,050 Maximum as determined by the Public Works Director
6 Encroachment Permit Fees:
7 Minor work $154.00 $161.00 Per project Fee
7-1.03 - Permit for curb cut for driveway entrance
or approach (Street Superintendent)
7-1.08 – Adjustment and variance from driveway
standards (City Engineer)
7-3.02 – Street cut or excavation permits (Public
Works)
7-4.02 - Temporary street obstruction permits
7-5.09 - Permits to construct sidewalk, walkway,
and/or driveway from curb to property line (Public
Works)
8 Major work (over $2,500)
4% value of project or as
Determined by Public Works
Director per Town Code
4% value of
project or as
Determined by
Public Works
Director per Town
Code
Percentage Fee
7-1.03 - Permit for curb cut for driveway entrance
or approach
7-1.08 – Adjustment and variance from driveway
standards
7-3.02 – Street cut or excavation permits
7-4.02 - Temporary street obstruction permits
7-5.09 - Permits to construct sidewalk, walkway,
and/or driveway from curb to property line
Major Work Fees vary depending on time to review
and inspect during the course of the project
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
6 98
Public Works
Miscellaneous Items
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
9 Sidewalks/Driveways - new & repair; debris or storage box $106.00 $111.00 Per project Fee 10 Revocable Encroachment Permit for structures in town right-of-way $315.00 $329.00 Per project Fee
11 Revocable Encroachment Permit for temporary use of town right-of-way (restaurant outdoor seating) $133.00 $139.00 Per project Fee 7-5.11-permit for amilbox inright of way 12 Plan Check-when applicable Hourly Staff Rate Hourly Staff Rate Per hour Fee Rate depends on actual Staff rate 13 Fence Permit Fees:
14 Fences within setbacks abutting street $99.00 $104.00 Per project Fee 15 Stop Work Fee for working without a permit Up to 3 times value of Public Works Permit Fee
Up to 3 times
value of Public
Works Permit Fee
Per project Penalty
Determined by the Public Works Director. 0-3
times based on stop work circumstances. If
unpermitted work is identified by the Town and the
owner addresses issues promptly, fee may be
waived or 1 times the permit fee. However, if
unpermitted work is not addressed and owner is
uncooperative, fee may be up to 3 times the permit
fee.
16 Plan Check-when applicable $141.00 $147.00 Per hour Fee 17 Grading Permit Fees: UBC Appendix Chapter 33 Table A-33B 18 100cy or less $118.00 $123.00 100 cy or less Fee
19 101cy to 1,000cy $118.00 $123.00 First 100 cy Fee Plus $17.85 for each add'l 100 cy 20 1,001cy to 10,000cy $365.00 $381.00 First 1,000 cy Fee Plus $14.80 for each add'l 1,000cy 21 10,001cy to 100,000cy $365.00 $381.00 First 10,000 cy Fee Plus $67.50 for each add'l 10,000cy 22 100,001 and above $1,218.00 $1,270.00 First 100,000 cy Fee Plus $37.00 for each add'l 100,000cy 23 Grading Plan Review Fees: UBC Appendix Chapter 33 Table A-33A 24 100cy or less $118.00 $123.00 100 cy or less Fee
25 101cy to 1,000cy $236.00 $246.00 First 100 cy Fee
26 1,001cy to 10,000cy $315.00 $329.00 First 1,000 cy Fee 27 10,001cy or more $315.00 $329.00 First 10,000 cy Fee $25.00 each add'l 10,000cy 28 Grading permit fee for work without a permit 3 times value of Public Works Permit Fee
3 times value of
Public Works
Permit Fee
Per project Penalty $500 minimum- determined by PW Director 29 Water Wells - potable and landscape wells $179.00 $187.00 Per well Fee 30 Grading Permit Extension Fee $158.00 $165.00 Per permit Fee ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
7 99
Public Works
Miscellaneous Items
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
31 Sidewalk Maintenance Program - Administration Fees
32 First $200 $47.00 $49.00 Fee
33 $201 - $500 $46 plus 15% of amount over $200
($100 Max)
$47 plus 15% of
amount over $200
($100 Max)
Fee $100 Max
34 $501 - $1,500 $77 plus 10% of amount over $500
($200 Max)
$79 plus 10% of
amount over $500
($200 Max)
Fee $200 Max
35 Over $1,500 $179 plus 5% of amount over $1,500
$183 plus 5% of
amount over
$1,500
Fee No Max
36 Arborist Site Visit and Arborist Report $215.00 $225.00 Per hour Fee 37 Street Cut Inspection $210.00 $219.00 Per hour Fee
38 Street Crew Cost (Red Curb Painting) Fees Waived Fees Waived Per project Fee 39 Temporary Trailer Fee Fees Waived Fees Waived Per Trailer Fee Permit for temporary trailers for habitation during construction and after disasters
40 Abandonment $1,000 min + # hours of consultant
time
$1,000 min + #
hours of
consultant time
Per hour Fee $1,000 minimum to be billed hourly
41 Penalty fee for After The Fact permits
3xpermit cost or $500 min.

Determined by building official or
DPW director
3xpermit cost or
$500 min.

Determined by
building official or
DPW director
Per project Penalty
42 DPW- RED TAG FEE
3xpermit cost or $500 min.

Determined by building official or
DPW director
3xpermit cost or
$500 min.

Determined by
building official or
DPW director
Per project Penalty
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
8 100
Public Works
Miscellaneous Items
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
43 Encroachment permit extension fee $79.00 $83.00 Per project Fee 44 Charging Interest on Abatements 1% Monthly 1% Monthly Per project Fee 45 Oversize Vehicle Permit - Single $17.00 $18.00 Per trip Fee $92 - Annual 46 Street Light Shield $262.00 $274.00 Per shield Fee
47 Stormwater Violation Fees $100-1ST VIOLATION / $200-2ND / $500-3RD, 4TH, ETC
$100-1ST
VIOLATION / $200-
2ND / $500-3RD,
4TH, ETC
Per occurrence Fee
48 Block Party Fee Fees Waived Fees Waived Per occurrence Fee 49 Extension Fee- For Permits Excluding Encroachment $79.00 $83.00 Per project Fee 50 Reactivation Fee $106.00 $111.00 Per project Fee
51 Flatwork Permit - Small/Medium less than 1000 sq ft $106.00 $111.00 Per project Fee 52 Flatwork Permit - Large Over 1000 sq ft $315.00 $329.00 Per project Fee 53 Floodplain Development Permit $100 deposit + hourly $100 deposit + hourly Per hour Fee
7-11.403 Special flood hazard area development
permit 7-11.402 – Review of required certifications
for floodplain Development permits:
(1) Certification required by Section 7-

11.501(c)(1) and Section 7-11.504 (lowest floor
elevations);
(2) Certification required by Section 7-

11.501(c)(2) (elevation or floodproofing of
nonresidential structures);
(3) Certification required by Section 7-

11.501(c)(3) (wet floodproofing standard);
(4) Certification of elevation required by Section
7-11.503(a)(3) (subdivisions and other proposed
development standards);
(5) Certification required by Section 7-11.506(b)
(floodway encroachments);
(6) "NON-CONVERSION AGREEMENT FOR
CONSTRUCTION WITHIN FLOOD HAZARD AREAS"
recorded deed restriction, review by town attorney
54 Permit to place newsrack on public property $100 deposit + hourly $100 deposit + hourly Per rack Fee
55 Frontage Improvement Fees At Cost of Requirement At Cost of Requirement Per project Fee or work
in lieu of
Public Works reviews frontage improvement
requirements based on the code requirements in
the right of way related to ADA, drainage,
emergency vehicle access etc.

ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
9 101
Library
Miscellaneous Items
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
1 Print Materials
2 Books lost or damaged beyond use Actual Cost Actual Cost Fee 3 Processing Fee $5.00 $5.00 Per incident Fee
4 Audio Visual Materials
5 A-V materials lost or damaged beyond use $3.00 -$7.00 Actual Cost Per Item Fee 6 Inter-Library Loan Fees:
7 Link + $1.00 ($15 Max) $0.00 Per day Fee $115 Replacement 8 ILL - Other $5.00 $5.00 Per request Fee Postage may apply 9 Other Fees
10 Photocopies/Computer Printing Black and White $0.20 $0.20 Per page Fee 11 Photocopies/Computer Printing Color $0.75 $0.75 Per page Fee 12 Take & Make Kits, Memory Kits, lost or damaged beyond use $0.00 Actual Cost Per Item Fee $50 Fee if item is returned to other library
13 Museum Passes $2.00 ($10 Max) $0.00 Per day Fee
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
10 102
Building
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
1 PreApplication Meeting - Non-commercial uses (Building) Fee was on planning section $210.00 Flat fee Fee Plus applicant pays $100 to Ross Valley Fire Department
2 PreApplication Meeting - Commercial Uses (Building) $0.00 $0.00 Flat fee Fee 3 Fee for Building Permit Plan-Check
65% of permit fee-Building Valuation
table will increase 2.5% for all base
rates
65% of permit feeBuilding Valuation
table will increase

2.5% for all base
rates
Percentage Fee Plan check beyond 2 submittals @
staff hr rate
4 Building Third Party Plan Check Fee (not including 3rd Party Fee) No fee
50% of permit fee
on top of 3rd
Party costs
Percentage Fee
This fee is in addition to the 3rd Party
fee and covers internal plan check
costs including assignment to 3rd
party, review of 3rd party plan check,
response to applicant, architect and
engineering questions, etc.
5 Stop Work Fee for working without a permit; retroactive permit penalty fee
Up to 5 times value of Permit Fee;
(Minimum $500)
Up to 5 times
value of Permit
Fee; (Minimum
$500)
Per project Penalty
Determined by the Department
Director or Building Official. 0-5
times based on stop work
circumstances. If work stops
immediatley and the owner
addresses issues promptly, the fee
may be waived or 1-3 times the
permit fee. However, if work
continues and owner is
uncooperative, fee may be up to 5
times the permit fee.
6 Energy Fees - projects affecting heated space 15% of Bldg Permit Fee 15% of Bldg Permit Fee Percentage Fee
7 Code Compliance Fee $301.00 $314.00 Per hour Fee
8 Plumbing Permit 15% of Bldg Permit fee or $154 if not associated w/other work
15% of Bldg
Permit fee or $157
if not associated
w/other work
Percentage Fee Fee waived for graywater projects
9 Electrical Permit 15% of Bldg Permit fee or $154 if not associated w/other work
15% of Bldg
Permit fee or $157
if not associated
w/other work
Percentage Fee Fee waived for local EV charging, roof
top solar, and tankless water heater
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
11 103
Building
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
10 Mechanical Permit 15% of Bldg Permit fee or $154 if not associated w/other work
15% of Bldg
Permit fee or $157
if not associated
w/other work
Percentage Fee
11 Demolition Permit $236.00 $246.00 Per project Fee
12 Swimming Pool Permit $626.00 $653.00 Per project Fee 13 Spa/Hot Tub Permit $313.00 $327.00 Per project Fee
14 Photo-voltaic System Permit and EV charging $190.00 $190.00 Per project Fee lose $30K-60K per year 15 Water Heater Replacement Permit $136.00 $142.00 Per project Fee No longer Fee waived for Tankless Water Heater
16 Furnace Replacement Permit $135.00 $141.00 Per project Fee 17 Re-Roof Permit Residential $158.00 $165.00 Per project Fee Fee waived for Cool Roof Initiatives 18 Re-Roof Permit Commercial Bldg Permit Fee Bldg Permit Fee Per project Fee Fee waived for Cool Roof Initiatives 19 Technology Fee 8.8% of Bldg Permit fees 8.8% of Bldg Permit fees Percentage Fee
20 Training Fee 3% of Bldg Permit fee 3% of Bldg Permit fee Percentage Fee
21 Permit Administrative Fee (change of owner, contractor, arch/engr ) $38.00 $40.00 Per project Fee
22 Window replacement (not associated with other work) $236.00 $246.00 Per project Fee 23 Minor Bathroom Remodel Permit Fee $628.00 $655.00 Per project Fee OTC $15,000 max. value of project 24 Minor Kitchen Remodel Permit Fee $842.00 $878.00 Per project Fee OTC $25,000 max. value of project 25 Plan Checks:
26 Plumbing Plan Check 15% of Bldg Permit Fee or 65% of Plumbing Permit Fee
15% of Bldg
Permit Fee or 65%
of Plumbing
Permit Fee
Percentage Fee
If work not associated with Bldg
Permit ($25 min) Fee
waived for graywater projects
27 Electrical Plan Check 15% of Bldg Permit Fee or 25% of Electrical Permit Fee
15% of Bldg
Permit Fee or 25%
of Electrical
Permit Fee
Percentage Fee If work not associated with Bldg
Permit ($25 min)
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
12 104
Building
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
28 Mechanical Plan Check 10% of Bldg Permit Fee or 65% of Mechanical Permit Fee
10% of Bldg
Permit Fee or 65%
of Mechanical
Permit Fee
Percentage Fee If work not associated with Bldg
Permit ($25 min)
29 Pool Plan Check $445.00 $464.00 Per project Fee 65% of Pool Permit fee 30 Spa/Hot Tub Plan Check $204.00 $213.00 Per project Fee 65% of Spa/Hot Tub 31 Plan Checks after 2 Plan Checks Consultant Fee Consultant Fee Per hour Fee Consultant Fee 32 Plan Check for revisions after permit issued $192.00 $201.00 Per hour Fee Time charged at hourly Building
Official rate and an additional hour
for each submittal. Minimum one
hour per submittal.
33 Staff Hourly Rate:
34 Building Official $192.00 $201.00 Per hour Fee
35 Building Inspector $139.00 $145.00 Per hour Fee
36 Street Bond Determined by Public Works Director
Determined by
Public Works
Director
Per project Bond Reimbursable if no damage to
street/public right of way
37 Gross Receipts Tax on all projects done by a contractor $0.50 $0.50 Per $1,000 valuation Fee
38 Seismic Fee - State fee on all residential and commercial work $0.10 $0.10 Per $1,000 valuation Fee
39 Green Building Fee $1.00 $1.00 Per $25,000
valuation Fee
40 Residential Resale Reports:
41 Single Family Residence $315.00 $329.00 Per report Fee 42 Multi-Family Residences $308 +$52 each add/t unit $314 +$53 each add/t unit Per report Fee
43 Failure To Obtain Report 1X Report Fee 1X Report Fee Per report Fee 44 Watercourse Permit $210.00 $219.00 Per project Fee
Fee may be waived for emergency
projects at the discretion of Public
Works Director
45 Floodplain Development Permit $106.00 $111.00 Per project Fee 46 Lot Line(Property Line Adjustment) $1000 Deposit $1000 Deposit Per hour Fee 25% administration plus hourly thereafter
47 Well Permit $236.00 $246.00 Per project Fee
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
13 105
Building
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
48 Reinstatement of Building Permit Fee 50% of bulding permit fee 50% of bulding permit fee Per project Fee
49 Extension of Building Permit Fee $106.00 $111.00 Per project Fee 50 Penalty fee for After The Fact permits Up to 5 times value of Permit Fee; (Minimum $500)
Up to 5 times
value of Permit
Fee; (Minimum
$500)
Per project Fee
Determined by the Department
Director or Building Offical. 0-5 times
based on stop work circumstances. If
unpermitted work is identified by the
Town and the owner addresses
issues promptly, the fee may be
waived or 1-3 times the permit fee.

However, if unpermitted work is not
addressed and the owner is
uncooperative, fee may be up to 5
times the permit fee.
51 Flood Gate Buidling Permits Fees Waived Fees Waived Per project Fee 52 Admin Assistant II $87.00 $91.00 Per hour Fee
53 Public Works Director $244.00 $255.00 Per hour Fee
54 Assistant Public Works Director $192.00 $201.00 Per hour Fee 55 Assistant Engineer $120.00 $126.00 Per hour Fee
56 Maintenance Supervisor $139.00 $145.00 Per hour Fee
57 Maintenance Worker I $86.00 $90.00 Per hour Fee
58 Senior Maintenance Worker $119.00 $124.00 Per hour Fee 59 Construction Inspector $382.00 $399.00 Per hour Fee
60 Consultant Consultant cost + 25% Consultant cost +
25%
Per Hour Fee Plan check or review as required by
outside consultant
Building permit fee waived for an ADU subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years to rent as an Affordable Unit reserved for occupancy by a Low Income Household at an Affordable Rent.
“Affordable Rent” is the maximum allowable Rent for an Affordable Unit that does not exceed one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of eighty percent (80%) of Area Median Income as adjusted for Assumed Household Size.
“Area Median Income” means median yearly income in Marin County as published pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Section 6932, or successor provision. “Low Income Household” means a household whose Household Income does not exceed the lower income limits applicable to Marin County, adjusted for household size, as published annually by the California Department of Housing and Community Development; generally a household with a Household Income between fifty percent (50%) and eighty percent (80%) of Area Median Income, adjusted for actual household size.

ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
14 106
Minimum Value Maximum Value Base Rate Plus $$
For every
$1,000 and
fraction
thereof

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 3,999.00 130.35 0.00 0.00
4,000.00 24,999.00 130.35 15.42 1,000.00
25,000.00 49,999.00 470.05 11.27 1,000.00
50,000.00 99,999.00 746.40 7.98 1,000.00
100,000.00 499,999.00 1,137.45 6.49 1,000.00
500,000.00 999,999.00 3,681.93 5.58 1,000.00
1,000,000.00 and above 6,429.75 4.41 1,000.00
Minimum Value Maximum Value Base Rate Plus $$
For every
$1,000 and
fraction
thereof

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 3,999.00 135.82 0.00 0.00
4,000.00 24,999.00 135.82 16.07 1,000.00
25,000.00 49,999.00 489.79 11.74 1,000.00
50,000.00 99,999.00 777.75 8.31 1,000.00
100,000.00 499,999.00 1,185.22 6.76 1,000.00
500,000.00 999,999.00 3,836.57 5.81 1,000.00
1,000,000.00 and above 6,699.80 4.59 1,000.00
Building Valuation Table
Proposed (All New Construction)
Building Valuation Table
Current (All New Construction)
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
15 107
Planning
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
1 Planning Commission Action Applications: Annexation $10,455.00 $10,895.00 Per application Deposit Plus 25% overhead on consultant costs
2 Planning Commission Action Applications: General Plan Amendment $3,967.00 $4,134.00 Flat fee Fee
3 Planning Commission Action Applications: Rezoning $3,967.00 $4,134.00 Flat fee Fee 4 Planning Commission First Application/Hearing (For
applications with a Planning Commission hearing such as Conditional Use Permit, Variance, Subdividision, Parcel Map, Lot Line Adjustment, Exceptions, Illuminated Sign, FAR
Exception, Demolition Permit, Grading Permits, Sign
Program, move building). Includes review of one plan
revision.
$2,178.13 $2,750.00 Flat fee Fee
5 Each additional application $136.00 $142.00 Flat fee Fee 6 Minor Exception - Administrative $234.00 $244.00 Flat fee Fee 7 Lot Merger - Administrative $320.00 $334.00 Flat fee Fee 8 Residential Design Review - Planning Director $955.00 $996.00 Flat Fee Fee 9 Commercial Design Review - Planning Director $955.00 $996.00 Flat fee Fee 10 Administrative Sign Review, conforming $50.00 $53.00 Flat fee Fee 11 Certificates of Compliance $2,550.00 $2,658.00 Per
certification Deposit Plus 25% overhead on consultant costs 12 Initial Study & Negative Declarations (for first 16 hours of staff time In-House) $6,120.00 $6,378.00 Flat fee Fee Plus 25% overhead on consultant costs 13 Environmental Impact Reports Consultant cost + 25% Consultant cost + 25% Flat fee Fee
14 Peer Reviews Consultant cost + 25% Consultant cost + 25% N/A Fee
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
16 108
Planning
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
15 Hourly Fee Planner $136.00 $136.00 Per hour Fee
16 Hourly Fee Director $174.00 $174.00 Per hour Fee New 17 Development Standards No charge No charge
18 General Plan maintenance 4% of Building Permit fees 4% of Building Permit fees Percentage Fee
19 Training fee 5% of application fees 5% of application fees Percentage Fee
20 Photocopies, per page (State requirement documents are charged per State Mandate) $0.20 $0.20 Per copy Fee
21 Review of R-1-H Precise Development Plan (PC) SAMC Sec. 10-3.1105 $3,686.00 $3,841.00 Flat fee Fee
22 Signs which are part of a project necessitating design review by the Planning Commission SAMC Sec. 10-9.409 $136.00 $142.00 Flat fee Fee 23 Planning Director requests for reasonable accommodation SAMC Sec. 10-10.03 $456.00 $476.00 Flat fee Fee
24 Second or Additional Public Hearing $1,815.00 $1,892.00 Flat fee Fee 25 Zoning ordinance amendment SAMC Sec. 10-3.803 $10,455.00 $10,895.00 Per application Deposit plus 25% overhead on any consultant costs
26 Preliminary or Specific Planned Development District SAMC Sec. 10-3.904 $4,292.00 $4,473.00 Flat fee Fee
27 Final Map (if dedications are involved) SAMC Sec. 10-2.603 $5,228.00 $5,448.00 Per application Deposit plus 25% overhead for consultant costs
28 R-1-H Development Plan Meeting with Open Space
Committee SAMC Sec. 10-3.1102 $1,123.00 $1,171.00 Flat fee Fee ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
17 109
Planning
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
29 Tentative parcel and tract map and final parcel and tract maps – Planning Director SAMC Sec. 10-3.1201 $418.00 $436.00 Flat fee Fee Plus $2,000 deposit to cover consultant and 25% overhead 30 Condtional Use Permit Planning Director SAMC Sec. 10-

3.1303 $955.00 $996.00 Flat fee Fee
31 Notice of public hearing - publication in newspaper SAMC Sec. 10-3.1602 $174.00 $182.00 Flat fee Fee Plus cost of publication 32 Renewal of a discretionary action SAMC Sec. 10-3.1608 $136.00 $142.00 Per extension request
Fee
33 Applications and determinations of unmergers (Public Works or Council) SAMC Sec. 10-3.273 $2,091.00 $2,179.00 Per application Deposit 34 Application for expanded telecommunication facilities Administrative $1,498.00 $1,561.00 Per facility Fee plus $10,000 deposit to cover consultant cost plus 25% 35 Application for design review/use permit for
telecommunication facilities (Planning Commission) $2,750.00 $2,750.00 Per facility Fee plus $10,000 deposit to cover consultant cost plus 25% 36 Application for density bonus SAMC Sec. 10-11.050
Administrative $931.00 $971.00 Flat fee Fee
37 Remove deed restriction - Administrative $348.00 $363.00 Flat fee Fee Plus any notary and recording costs 38 Residential chicken-keeping permit SAMC Sec. 5-1.05 $0.00 $0.00 Flat fee Fee 39 PreApplication Meeting - Non-commercial uses (Planning) $105.00 $105.00 Flat fee Fee Plus applicant pays $100 to Ross Valley Fire Department
40 Review of Home Occupation Application $0.00 $0.00 Flat fee Fee 41 Review of Use Proposal or Business License Application $0.00 $0.00 Flat fee Fee 42 Penalty for work without a permit 1x Application Fee 1x Application Fee Per application Penalty 43 Remove deed restriction to allow a second unit $0.00 $0.00 Flat fee Fee Plus any notary and recording costs ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
18 110
Planning
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
44 PreApplication Meeting - Commercial Uses $0.00 $0.00 Flat fee Fee 45 Lot Line Adjustment - Planning Director $800.00 $800.00 Flat fee Fee 46 Administrative Design Review - No Notice $50.00 $53.00 Flat fee Fee 47 Streamlined Review under Ca.Govt. Code Sec. 65913.4 (SB 35) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Per application Deposit New
48 Change of Address (property owner request) $200.00 $200.00 Flat fee Fee New 49 Planning Commission Use Permit for exceptions to create new Accessory Dwelling Unit $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Flat fee Fee New DEPOSITS will be charged at the fully burdened hourly rate calculation for each staff position.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS: Fees charged by outside agencies for review/process of environmental documents will be charged to the applicant in addition to the fees herein.

ALL PLANNING APPLICATIONS: Town Attorney costs will be passed on directly to applicant as incurred and the Town may request a deposit to cover the cost of anticipated town attorney time.

ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
19 111
Recreation
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
1 Administrative Rates
2 Administrative Registration Fee $10.00 $10.00 Per class Fee 3 Cancelation Fee $25.00 $25.00 Per class Fee New
4 Security deposit $266.00 $278.00 Per
occurrence
Deposit
5 Tennis Key Fees:
6 Resident (R): Full Year $37.00 $39.00 Per year Fee
7 Resident (R): Jul-Dec $27.00 $29.00 Every six
months Fee
8 Non-Resident (NR): Full Year $89.00 $93.00 Per year Fee 9 Non-Resident (NR): Jul-Dec $58.00 $61.00 Every six
months Fee
10 Commercial Dog Walker Permit (Annual) $111.00 $116.00 Per year Fee 11 Sign Fees
12 Hub Sign $111.00 $116.00 Per week Fee
13 Tunstead Street Banner $262.00 $274.00 Per week Fee
14 Sir Francis Drake Street Banner $340.00 $355.00 Per week Fee 15 Facility Rental Fees - Picnic & Park Areas 3 Hour Minimum 16 Memorial Park - Small Picnic Area - R $30.00 $32.00 Per hour Fee 17 Memorial Park - Small Picnic Area -NR $32.00 $34.00 Per hour Fee 18 Memorial Park - Large Picnic Area - R $40.00 $42.00 Per hour Fee 19 Memorial Park - Large Picnic Area - NR $45.00 $47.00 Per hour Fee 20 Memorial Park - Large Picnic Area - Inflatable Jumper Fee $42.00 $44.00 Per hour Fee 21 Robson Park - Upper Picnic Area - R $30.00 $32.00 Per hour Fee 22 Robson Park - Upper Picnic Area - NR $37.00 $39.00 Per hour Fee 23 Robson Park - Lower Picnic Area - R $35.00 $37.00 Per hour Fee 24 Robson Park - Lower Picnic Area - NR $47.00 $49.00 Per hour Fee 25 Creek Park Picnic Area - R $40.00 $42.00 Per hour Fee 26 Creek Park Picnic Area - NR $50.00 $53.00 Per hour Fee 27 Elders Garden - R $17.00 $18.00 Per hour Fee
28 Elders Garden - NR $22.00 $23.00 Per hour Fee
29 Creek Park Amphitheatre -Resident NA NA Per hour Fee 30 Creek Park Amphitheatre - Non-Resident NA NA Per hour Fee ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
20 112
Recreation
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
31 Athletic Field Rental Fees - 2 Hour Minimum Rental
32 Memorial Park - Single Baseball Field
32 Group A $41.00 $43.00 Per hour Fee
Non-Profit organizations, school related groups,
community organizations that charge a nominal fee
to cover their expenses (Scouts, Homeowners
Assoc., Youth Sports Groups, religious
organizations, etc.)
33 Group B $62.00 $65.00 Per hour Fee Private individuals, non-profit fundraising activities 34 Group C $82.00 $86.00 Per hour Fee Commercial, for profit groups 35 Indoor Facilities
36 ICC Kitchen, Lower Classrooms (2 hr min.) Resident $29.00 $31.00 Per hour Fee 37 ICC Kitchen, Lower Classrooms (2 hr min.) Non-Resident $39.00 $41.00 Per hour Fee 38 ICC Vista Room, (2 hr min.) Resident $34.00 $36.00 Per hour Fee 39 ICC Vista Room, (2 hr min.) Non- Resident $49.00 $52.00 Per hour Fee 40 Robson Harrington Meeting Room - Weekdays (2 hr min.) 41 Group A $32.00 $34.00 Per hour Fee
Non-Profit organizations, school related groups,
community organizations (Scouts, Homeowners
Assoc., Youth Sports Groups, religious
organizations, etc.)
42 Group B $37.00 $39.00 Per hour Fee Private individuals, non-profit fundraising activities 43 Group C $47.00 $49.00 Per hour Fee Commercial, for profit groups 44 Robson Harrington Weekend Rental - First Floor (4 hr min.) 45 Group A $79.00 $83.00 Per hour Fee
Non-Profit organizations, school related groups,
community organizations (Scouts, Homeowners
Assoc., Youth Sports Groups, religious
organizations, etc.)
46 Group B $84.00 $88.00 Per hour Fee Private individuals, non-profit fundraising activities 47 Group C $99.00 $104.00 Per hour Fee Commercial, for profit groups ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
21 113
Police
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
1 Merchant Parking Permits $25.00 $25.00 Per year Fee
2 Overnight Parking Permits $50.00 $50.00 Per year Fee
3 Vehicle Impound Release $100.00 $100.00 Per incident Fee 4 Clearance/Citizen Letter $20.00 $20.00 Per request Fee 5 Report Copy fee $10.00 $10.00 Per report Fee
6 Fingerprinting "rolling" fee $20.00 $20.00 Per event Fee 7 Violations:
8 Sign Retrieval $25.00 $25.00 Per violation Penalty
9 Parked without permit $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 10 Parked contrary to signs & markings $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 11 Improperly parked in marked space $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 12 No Parking/Stopping Red Zone $55.00 $55.00 Per violation Penalty 13 No Parking Yellow/Green/White $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 14 Failure to Curb Wheels on 3% Grade $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 15 Parked in Excess of 72 Hours $155.00 $155.00 Per violation Penalty 16 Parked in Excess of 2 Hours $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 17 Restricted Parking Only $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 18 Night Parking - 30 minute Limit 2AM-6AM $24.00 $24.00 Per violation Penalty 19 Posted No Parking $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 20 Parked without 12' clearance $55.00 $55.00 Per violation Penalty 21 No Parking on Private Property without consent $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 22 Expired Meter $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty
23 No Parking on Crosswalk $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 24 No Parking Blocking Driveway $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 25 No Parking on Sidewalk $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 26 No Parking Wheelchair Ramp Access $290.00 $290.00 Per violation Penalty 27 No Parking/Stopping in Fire Lane/Road $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 28 Parked in excess of 18" from curb $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 29 Blue Zone - Handicapped Only $290.00 $290.00 Per violation Penalty 30 No Parking within 15' of Fire Hydrant $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 31 Parked on school grounds for sale $33.00 $33.00 Per violation Penalty 32 Parked in intersection, crosswalk, sidewalk, in front of a driveway, more than 18" from the curb or facing the wrong way
$40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty
33 Double parked $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty
34 Overtime parking, illegally parked on school grounds, vehicle parked for sale on street, illegally parked, posted vehicle for sale and loading zone
$40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty
35 Tow Away Zone $50.00 $50.00 Per violation Penalty
36 Expired tabs $84.00 $84.00 Per violation Penalty
ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
22 114
Police
# Description Current Fee/Charge
Proposed
Fee/Charge Unit Type Notes
37 Vehicle for sale on street $111.00 $111.00 Per violation Penalty 38 Parked on parkway $111.00 $111.00 Per violation Penalty 39 Abandoned vehicle $278.00 $278.00 Per violation Penalty 40 Parked in area for handicapped $290.00 $290.00 Per violation Penalty 41 Blocking handicapped access ramp $290.00 $290.00 Per violation Penalty 42 Handicapped parking $290.00 $290.00 Per violation Penalty 43 Disabled crosshatch markings $290.00 $290.00 Per violation Penalty 44 Parked in restricted EV charging spaces and Town's on- and off-street parking facilites $40.00 $40.00 Per violation Penalty 45 OVERSIZED VEHICLE FEES:
46 Single trip permit $16.00 $16.00 Per trip Regulated
47 Repetitive trip permit $16.00 $16.00 Per trip Regulated max $90 for 6 mo period 48 Annual trip permit $16.00 $16.00 Per trip Regulated max of $90 for 1 yr period 49 Oversized Vehicle Escort Fee $216.12 $220.00 Per trip Fee ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
23 115
Town of San Anselmo - User Fee
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate
Department Position
Fully Burdened
Hourly Rate
Fully Burdened
Hourly Rate
Position Rates Current Proposed
01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Accounting and Benefits Technician 91.00 95.00 01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Administrative Services Technician 71.00 74.00 01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Finance/Administration Services Director 142.00 148.00 01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Senior Accountant/Financial Supervisor 101.00 106.00 01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Town Clerk 70.00 73.00
01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Town Manager 164.00 171.00
01: LIBRARY Library - Lead Library Assistant 89.00 93.00 01: LIBRARY Library - Librarian I 93.00 97.00
01: LIBRARY Library - Library Assistant 84.00 88.00
01: LIBRARY Library - Town Librarian 195.00 204.00
01: PLANNING Planning - Assistant Planner 98.00 103.00
01: PLANNING Planning - Planning Director 174.00 182.00 01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Administrative Assistant II 87.00 91.00 01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Assistant Engineer 120.00 126.00
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Assistant Public Works Director 192.00 201.00 01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Building Inspector 139.00 145.00
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Building Official 192.00 201.00
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Maintenance Supervisor 139.00 145.00 01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Maintenance Worker I 86.00 90.00
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Maintenance Worker II 106.00 111.00 01: PUBLIC WORKS PW -Project Coordinator 120.00 126.00
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Public Works Director 244.00 255.00 01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Senior Maintenance Worker 119.00 124.00 01: RECREATION Rec - Administrative Assistant II 83.00 87.00 01: RECREATION Rec - Community Services Director 133.00 139.00 19: ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND Fund 19 - Assistant Public Works Director 192.00 201.00 21: RECREATION Fund 21 - Recreation Coordinator I 123.00 129.00 21: RECREATION Fund 21 - Recreation Coordinator II 131.00 137.00 21: RECREATION Fund 21 - Recreation Supervisor 135.00 141.00 27: LIBRARY TAX FUND Fund 27 - Lead Library Assistant 86.00 90.00 27: LIBRARY TAX FUND Fund 27 - Librarian II 110.00 115.00 27: LIBRARY TAX FUND Fund 27 - Library Assistant 93.00 97.00 31: ISABEL COOK COMMUNITY CENTER Fund 31 - Maintenance Supervisor 426.00 444.00 34: ROBSON HOUSE Fund 34 - Maintenance Supervisor 240.00 251.00 ITEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
TEM 7 - EXHIBIT A
24 116

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
User Fee Study Report
October 2018
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
117
i Comprehensive User Fee Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ i Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1 User Fee Background .............................................................................................................................. 2 Background .................................................................................................................................................. 2 California User Fee History .......................................................................................................................... 2 Additional Policy Considerations ................................................................................................................. 3 Study Objective....................................................................................................................................... 4 Scope of the Study ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Aim of the Report ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Project Approach and Methodology ........................................................................................................ 6 Conceptual Approach ................................................................................................................................... 6 Fully Burdened Hourly Rates ........................................................................................................................ 6 Summary Steps of the Study ........................................................................................................................ 7 Allowable Costs ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Quality Control/Quality Assurance .............................................................................................................. 8 Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current fees............................................................................. 9 Town Staff Contributions ............................................................................................................................. 9 San Anselmo User Fees ......................................................................................................................... 10 Cost Recovery............................................................................................................................................. 10 Subsidization .............................................................................................................................................. 10 Impact on Demand (Elasticity) ................................................................................................................... 11 Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 11 Finance & Administration ..................................................................................................................... 12 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 Public Works ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Library .................................................................................................................................................. 14 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Building ................................................................................................................................................ 15 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
118
ii Comprehensive User Fee Study
Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 Planning ................................................................................................................................................ 16 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................ 17 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Police .................................................................................................................................................... 18 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered ............................................................................. 19 Appendix B – Fully Burdened Hourly Rates ............................................................................................ 20 Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis .................................................................................................... 22 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
119
1 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Executive Summary
The Town of San Anselmo engaged Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to determine the full costs incurred by the Town to support the various activities for which the Town charges user fees. Due to the complexity and the breadth of performing a comprehensive review of fees, Willdan employed a variety of fee methodologies to identify the full costs of individual fee and program activities. This report and the appendices herein identifies 100% full cost recovery for Town services and the recommended level of recovery as determined through discussion with departmental staff.

The reality of the local government fee environment is that significant increases to achieve 100% cost recovery can often not be feasible, desirable, or appropriate depending on policy direction —particularly in a single year. The recommended fees identified herein are either at or less than full cost recovery.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
120
2 Comprehensive User Fee Study
User Fee Background
Background
As part of a general cost recovery strategy, local governments adopt user fees to fund programs and services that provide limited or no direct benefit to the community as a whole. As cities struggle to maintain levels of service and variability of demand, they have become increasingly aware of subsidies provided by the General Fund and have implemented cost-recovery targets. To the extent that governments use general tax monies to provide individuals with private benefits, and not require them to pay the full cost of the service (and, therefore, receive a subsidy), the government is limiting funds that may be available to provide other community-wide benefits. In effect, the government is using community funds to pay for private benefit. Unlike most revenue sources, cities have more control over the level of user fees they charge to recover costs, or the subsidies they can institute.

Fees in California are required to conform to the statutory requirements of the California Constitution, Proposition 218, and the California Code of Regulations. The Code also requires that the Town Council adopt fees by either ordinance or resolution, and that any fees in excess of the estimated total cost of rendering the related services must be approved by a popular vote of two-thirds of those electors voting because the charge would be considered a tax and not a fee.

California User Fee History
Before Proposition 13, California cities were less concerned with potential subsidies and recovering the cost of their services from individual fee payers. In times of fiscal shortages, cities simply raised property taxes, which funded everything from police and recreation to development-related services. However, this situation changed with the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978.

Proposition 13 established the era of revenue limitation in California local government. In subsequent years, the state saw a series of additional limitations to local government revenues. Proposition 4 (1979) defined the difference between a tax and a fee: a fee can be no greater than the cost of providing the service; and Proposition 218 (1996) further limited the imposition of taxes for certain classes of fees. As a result, cities were required to secure a supermajority vote in order to enact or increase taxes. Since the public continues to resist efforts to raise local government taxes, cities have little control and very few successful options for new revenues. Compounding this limitation, the State of California took a series of actions in the 1990’s and 2000’s to improve the State’s fiscal situation—at the expense of local governments. As an example, in 2004-05, the Educational Revenue Augmentation Funds (“ERAF”) take-away of property taxes and the reduction of Vehicle License Fees have severely reduced local tax revenues.

In addition, on November 2, 2010, California voters approved Proposition 26, the “Stop Hidden Taxes Initiative”, which is aimed at defining “regulatory fees” as a special tax rather than a fee, thus requiring approval by two-thirds vote of local voters. These regulatory fees are typically intended to mitigate the societal and environmental impacts of a business or person’s activities. Proposition 26 contains seven categories of exceptions. The vast majority of fees that cities would seek to adopt will most likely fall into one or more of these exemptions.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
121
3 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Additional Policy Considerations
The recent trend for municipalities is to update their fee schedules to reflect the actual costs of certain public services primarily benefitting users. User Fees recover costs associated with the provision of specific services benefiting the user, thereby reducing the use of General Fund monies for such purposes.

In addition to collecting the direct cost of labor and materials associated with processing and administering user services, it is common for local governments to recover support costs. Support costs are those costs relating to a local government’s central service departments that are properly allocable to the local government’s operating departments. Central services support cost allocations were incorporated using the resulting indirect overhead percentages determined through the Cost Allocation Plan. This plan was developed prior to the User Fee study to determine the burden placed upon central services by the operating departments in order to allocate a proportionate share of central service cost.

As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services fluctuate over time, a significant element in the development of any fee schedule is that it has the flexibility to remain current. Therefore, it is recommended that the Town include an inflationary factor in the resolution adopting the fee schedule to allow the Town Council, by resolution, to annually increase or decrease the fees.

The Town may employ many different inflationary factors. The most commonly used inflator is some form of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as it is widely well known and accepted. A similar inflator is the implicit price deflator for GDP, which is much like the CPI except that while the CPI is based on the same “basket” of goods and services every year, the price deflators’ “basket” can change year to year. Since the primary factor for the cost of a Town’s services is usually the costs of the personnel involved, tying an inflationary factor that connects more directly to the personnel costs can be suitable if there is a clear method, or current practice of obtaining said factor.

Each Town should use an inflator that they believe works the best for their specific situation and needs. It is also recommended that the Town perform this internal review annually with a comprehensive review of services and fees performed every three to five years, which would include adding or removing fees for any new or eliminated programs/services.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
122
4 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Study Objective
As the Town of San Anselmo seeks to efficiently manage limited resources and adequately respond to increased service demands, it needs a variety of tools. These tools provide assurance that the Town has the best information and the best resources available to make sound decisions, fairly and legitimately set fees, maintain compliance with state law and local policies, and meet the needs of the Town administration and its constituency. Given the limitations on raising revenue in local government, the Town recognizes that a User Fee Study is a very cost-effective way to understand the total cost of services and identify potential fee deficiencies. Essentially, a User Fee is a payment for a requested service provided by a local government that primarily benefits an individual or group.

The total cost of each service included in this analysis is based on the full cost of providing Town services, including direct salaries and benefits of Town staff, direct departmental costs, and indirect costs from central service support. This study determines the full cost recovery fee for the Town to provide each service; however, each fee is set at the Town’s discretion, up to 100% of the total cost, as specified in this report.

The principle goal of the study was to help the Town determine the full cost of the services that the Town provides. In addition, Willdan established a series of additional objectives including:
• Developing a rational basis for setting fees
• Identifying subsidy amount, if applicable, of each fee in the model • Enhancing fairness and equity
• Ensuring compliance with State law
• Developing an updatable and comprehensive list of fees • Maintaining accordance with Town policies and goals
The study results will help the Town better understand its true costs of providing services and may serve as a basis for making informed policy decisions regarding the most appropriate fees, if any, to collect from individuals and organizations that require individualized services from the Town.

Scope of the Study
The scope of this study encompasses a review and calculation of the user fees charged by the following San Anselmo departments and fee groups:
• Finance & Administration
• Public Works
• Library
• Building
• Planning
• Recreation
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
123
5 Comprehensive User Fee Study
The study involved the identification of existing and potential new fees, fee schedule restructuring, data collection and analysis, orientation and consultation, quality control, communication and presentations, and calculation of individual service costs (fees) or program cost recovery levels.

Aim of the Report
The User Fee Study focused on the cost of Town services, as Town staff currently provides them at existing, known, or reasonably anticipated service and staff levels. This report provides a summary of the study results, and a general description of the approach and methods Willdan and Town staff used to determine the recommended fee schedule. The report is not intended to document all of the numerous discussions throughout the process, nor is it intended to provide influential dissertation on the qualities of the utilized tools, techniques, or other approaches.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
124
6 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Project Approach and Methodology
Conceptual Approach
The basic concept of a User Fee Study is to determine the “reasonable cost” of each service provided by the Town for which it charges a user fee. The full cost of providing a service may not necessarily become the Town’s fee, but it serves as the objective basis as to the maximum amount that may be collected.

The standard fee limitation established in California law for property-related (non-discretionary) fees is the “estimated, reasonable cost” principle. In order to maintain compliance with the letter and spirit of this standard, every component of the fee study process included a related review. The use of budget figures, time estimates, and improvement valuation clearly indicates reliance upon estimates for some data.

Fully Burdened Hourly Rates
The total cost of each service included in this analysis is primarily based on the Fully Burdened Hourly Rates (FBHRs) that were determined for Town personnel directly involved in providing services. The FBHRs include not only personnel salary and benefits, but also any costs that are reasonably ascribable to personnel. The cost elements that are included in the calculation of fully burdened rates are:
• Salaries & benefits of personnel involved
• Operating costs applicable to fee operations
• Departmental support, supervision, and administration overhead • Internal Service Costs charged to each department
• Indirect Town-wide overhead costs calculated through the Cost Allocation Plan An important factor in determining the fully burdened rate is in the calculation of productive hours for personnel. This calculation takes the available workable hours in a year of 2,080 and adjusts this figure to account for calculated or anticipated hours’ employees are involved in non-billable activities such as paid vacation, sick leave, emergency leave, holidays, and other considerations as necessary. Dividing the full cost by the number of productive hours provides the FBHR.

The FBHRs are then used in conjunction with time estimates, when appropriate, to calculate a fees' cost based on the personnel and the amount of their time that is involved in providing each service.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
125
7 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Summary Steps of the Study
The methodology to evaluate most User Fee levels is straightforward and simple in concept. The following list provides a summary of the study process steps:

Allowable Costs
This report identifies three types of costs that, when combined, constitute the fully burdened cost of a service (Appendix A). Costs are defined as
direct labor, including salary and benefits,
departmental overhead costs, and the
Town’s central services overhead, where
departmental and central service overhead
costs constitute support costs. These cost
types are defined as follows:
• Direct Labor (Personnel Costs): The
costs related to staff salaries for
time spent directly on fee-related
services.
• Departmental Overhead: A
proportional allocation of
departmental overhead costs,
including operation costs such as
supplies and materials that are necessary for the department to function. • Central Services Overhead: These costs, detailed in the Town’s Cost Allocation Plan, represent services provided by those Central Services Departments whose primary function is to support other Town departments.

Data Analysis
Department Interviews
Time Estimates
Labor Costs
Cost Allocation Plan
Building Cost Layers
Direct Services
Indirect Services
Department Overhead
Town-Wide Overhead
Set Fees
Define the Full Cost of
Services
Set Cost Recovery Policy
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
126
8 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Methodology
The three methods of analysis for calculating fees used in this report are the:

Case Study Method (Standard Unit Cost Build-Up Approach): This approach estimates the actual labor and material costs associated with providing a unit of service to a single user. This analysis is suitable when Town staff time requirements do not vary dramatically for a service, or for special projects where the time and cost requirements are easy to identify at the project’s outset. Further, the method is effective in instances when a staff member from one department assists on an application, service or permit for another department on an as-needed basis. Costs are estimated based upon interviews with Town staff regarding the time typically spent on tasks, a review of available records, and a time and materials analysis.

Programmatic Approach: In some instances, the underlying data is not available or varies widely, leaving a standard unit cost build-up approach impractical. In addition, market factors and policy concerns (as opposed to actual costs) tend to influence fee levels more than other types of services. Willdan employed a different methodology where appropriate to fit the programs’ needs and goals. Typical programmatic approach cases are facility use fees, penalties, and instances where a program cost is divided over the user base to obtain a per applicant cost for shared cost services.

Valuation Based Fees: This manner of collection is used when the valuation of the improvement can be used as a proxy for the amount of effort it would take for Town staff to complete the service provided.

More specifically, this approach is commonly used for certain User Fees in the Building Division. It is generally accepted that as a project’s size scales up, the cost of the project increases, and the amount of effort needed to review and inspect also increases. Using a valuation-based fees provides for a system that can adjust as project sizes scale. Land is not included in the valuation.

Quality Control/Quality Assurance
All study components are interrelated, thus flawed data at any step in the process will cause the ultimate results to be inconsistent and unsound. The elements of our Quality Control process for User Fee calculations include:
• Involvement of knowledgeable Town staff
• Clear instructions and guidance to Town staff
• Reasonableness tests and validation
• Normalcy/expectation ranges
• FTE balancing
• Internal and external reviews
• Cross-checking
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
127
9 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current fees
Within the fee tables in Appendix C, the differences identified between the full costs calculated through the study and the fee levels currently in effect. The reasons for differences between the two can arise from a number of possible factors including:
• Previous fee levels may have been set at levels less than full cost intentionally, based on policy decisions
• Staffing levels and the positions that complete fee and service activity may vary from when the previous costs were calculated
• Personnel and materials costs could have increased at levels that differed from any inflationary factors used to increase fees since the last study
• Costs that this study has identified as part of the full cost of services may not have been accounted for in a previous study
o Departmental overhead and administration costs
o Indirect overhead from the Cost Allocation Plan
• Changes in processes and procedures within a department, or the Town as a whole Town Staff Contributions
As part of the study process, Willdan received tremendous support and cooperation from Town staff, which contributed and reviewed a variety of components to the study, including:
• Budget and other cost data
• Staffing structures
• Fee and service structures, organization, and descriptions • Direct and indirect work hours (billable/non-billable) • Time estimates to complete work tasks
• Frequency and current fee levels
• Review of draft results and other documentation
A User Fee Study requires significant involvement of the managers and line staff from the departments— on top of their existing workloads and competing priorities. The contributions from Town staff were critical to this study. We would like to express our appreciation to the Town and its staff for their assistance, professionalism, positive attitudes, helpful suggestions, responsiveness, and overall cooperation.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
128
10 Comprehensive User Fee Study
San Anselmo User Fees
Cost Recovery
The cost recovery models, by department/division fee type, are presented in detail in Appendix C. Full cost recovery is determined by summing the estimated amount of time each position (in increments of minutes or hours) spends to render a service. Time estimates for each service rendered were predominately determined by Willdan and Town Staff through a time and materials survey conducted for each department/division fee included in the study. The resulting cost recovery amount represents the total cost of providing each service. The Town’s current fee being charged for each service, if applicable, is provided in this section, as well, for reference.

It is important to note that the time and materials survey used to determine the amount of time each employee spends assisting in the provision of the services listed on the fee schedule is essential in identifying the total cost of providing each service. Specifically, in providing services, a number of employees are often involved in various aspects of the process, spending anywhere from a few minutes to several hours on the service.

The principle goal of this study was to identify the cost of Town services, to provide information to help the Town make informed decisions regarding the actual fee levels and charges. The responsibility to determine the final fee levels is a complicated task. Town staff must consider many issues in formulating recommendations, and the Town Council must consider those same issues and more in making the final decisions.

Town staff assumes the responsibility to develop specific fee level recommendations to present to the Town Council. Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules to guide the Town, since many of the considerations are based on the unique characteristics of the Town of San Anselmo, and administrative and political discretion. However, in setting the level of full cost recovery for each fee, one should consider whether the service solely benefits one end user or the general community.

Subsidization
Recalling the definition of a user fee helps guide decisions regarding subsidization. The general standard is that individuals (or groups) whom receive a wholly private benefit should pay 100% of the full cost of the services. In contrast, services that are simply public benefit should be funded entirely by the general fund’s tax dollars. Unfortunately, for the decision makers, many services fall into the range between these two extremes. The graphic on the following page illustrates the potential decision basis.

Further complicating the decision, opponents of fees often assert that the activities subject to the fees provide economic, cultural, “quality of life,” or other community benefits that exceed the costs to the Town.

It is recommended the Town consider such factors during its deliberations regarding appropriate fee levels.

Of course, subsidization can be an effective public policy tool, since it can be used to reduce fees to encourage certain activities (such as compliance inspections to ensure public safety) or allow some people to be able to afford to receive services they otherwise could not at the full cost. In addition, subsidies can ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
129
11 Comprehensive User Fee Study
be an appropriate and justifiable action, such as to allow citizens to rightfully access services, without burdensome costs.

Despite the intent, it is important for the Town and public to understand that subsidies must be covered by another revenue source, such as the General Fund. Therefore, the general taxpayer will potentially help to fund private benefits, and/or other Town services will not receive funds that are otherwise directed to cover subsidies.

Impact on Demand (Elasticity)
Economic principles of elasticity suggest that increased costs for services (higher fees) will eventually curtail the demand for the services; whereas lower fees may spark an incentive to utilize the services and encourage certain actions. Either of these conditions may be a desirable effect to the Town. However, the level of the fees that would cause demand changes is largely unknown. The Cost of Service Study did not attempt to evaluate the economic or behavioral impacts of higher or lower fees; nevertheless, the Town should consider the potential impacts of these issues when deciding on fee levels.

Summary
If the Town’s principal goal of this study were to maximize revenues from user fees, Willdan would recommend setting user fees at 100% of the full cost identified in this study. However, we understand that revenue enhancement is not the only goal of a cost of service study, and sometimes full-cost recovery is not needed, desired, or appropriate. Other Town and departmental goals, Town Council priorities, policy initiatives, past experience, implementation issues, and other internal and external factors may influence staff recommendations and Town Council decisions. In this case, the proper identification of additional services (new or existing services) and creation of a consistent and comprehensive fee schedule was the primary objective of this study. Town staff has reviewed the full costs and identified the “recommended fee levels” for consideration by Town Council. The attached appendices exhibit these unit fees individually.

The preceding sections provide background for each department or division and the results of this study’s analysis of their fees. For the full list of each fee’s analysis, refer to Appendix C of this report.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
130
12 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Finance & Administration
The Administration & Finance Department implements the legislative actions of the Town Council and provides for the Town’s administrative, fiscal, personnel, property management, public information, and record keeping functions. In addition, its staff manages labor relations and staff support, intergovernmental relations, business license administration, risk management and insurance administration, the Town’s franchise agreements for cable television and solid waste collection, and state and federal mandates such as the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Department provides administration and coordination for various town policies, programs, and procedures.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Finance and Administration Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The services listed for Finance are primarily Business Licenses which were not analyzed as a part of this study. The analysis of the remaining Finance and Administration services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for Town Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. It is recommended that the Town set Finance and Administration fees at or near 100% cost recovery for most fees as detailed in Appendix C as the analysis found that all current fees were at or below the full cost of providing service. As a result, 2 fees would increase, 53 fees would remain at their current levels (49 of which are Business License fees), and 3 new fees will be added. The average fee increase for Finance and Administration would be 17%.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
131
13 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Public Works
The Engineering staff is responsible for administering public works projects, providing cost-effective engineering management of Town infrastructure within budget limits, delivery of accurate, reliable and timely plan/permit review and inspection services as required by the Building Code in accordance with the expectations of the Town Council and the community. The Street and Park Maintenance division of the Public Works Department is responsible for the routine maintenance of Town streets, median islands, parking lots, storm drains and seasonal creek clearings, emergency response in storms, and other Town maintenance projects as required. In addition, staff is responsible for maintaining the Town’s parks and community gathering areas (Memorial Park, Creek Park, Sorich Park, Lansdale Station Park, RobsonHarrington Park and Grounds and Faude Park) and for the maintenance and upkeep of the landscaped areas surrounding Town facilities. Street and Park Maintenance is also responsible for the development of improvements for most of the Town’s parks and community gathering areas to further serve public needs and enhance existing landscapes. Included in this enhancement are reduction of fire fuel and improvement of accessibility for disabled persons in Town parks and public gathering areas.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with the Public Works Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of services in Public Works relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for Town Central Services.

Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis showed that current services are being provided well below the cost of providing them. Suggested fee levels were determined to increase cost recovery while mitigating fee increase impact on demand. Due to the suggested fee levels in Appendix C, the average fee level increase would be 35%, and the proposed subsidy levels are also detailed per service. There would be an increase to 20 fees, decrease to 1 fee, 9 fees would remain as currently set, and 16 new fees would also be added.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
132
14 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Library
The San Anselmo Public Library strives to be a hub of information, knowledge, culture and inspiration in the heart of San Anselmo. The services provided by the Town Library staff are designed to meet the informational and recreational needs of residents and businesses in a timely and professional manner, to enrich the lives of library patrons and to encourage children and teens to read.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with the Library. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The services included in Library are a mixture of fines and user fees. The fines are set to deter the listed activities, and the analysis of the user fees relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for Town Central Services.

Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. 2 fees are proposed to increase, 4 fees to decrease, 11 fees to stay at their current levels, and 1 new fee would be added as detailed in Appendix C. Remaining subsidy levels for user fee services are shown as well.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
133
15 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Building
The Building Department is responsible for enforcing the California construction and energy codes by reviewing building plans and issuing construction permits for any construction and demolition that takes place within the Town. Most projects require a permit of some kind. This is necessary to ensure that all buildings meet the minimum standards to protect their occupants and neighbors. The Building Department is also responsible for the issuance of a residential record (resale) report before the sale of any house. Town ordinance requires a records report and site inspection prior to the sale of any residence.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with the Building Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of Building relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for Town Central Services. The analysis found that current services are being provided well below the cost of providing them. It is recommended that the Town set Building services at the levels detailed in Appendix C, with average fee cost recovery levels being at around 40%. As a result, there would be an increase to 19 fees, 17 fees would remain as currently set and 17 new fees will be added as detailed in Appendix C.

In addition to the above referenced fees listed under Building, the Building Permit fees are also provided by this division. For the Building Permit fees, valuation is used as a proxy for measuring the amount of effort needed to provide services on a case by case basis. This method is an industry standard widely used by other jurisdictions to evaluate the cost of providing service. It is generally understood that the larger and more complex a project is, more time and effort that is required to provide the service. Project valuation also follows that trend, and so by using a combination of either project valuation or historical revenue figures along with a multiplier or cost recovery analysis for historical and anticipated future trends, current cost recovery along with variability in charges due to project type and scale is determined. The result of the cost analysis completed for the Building Permit program found that the program is currently operating at

98.3% cost recovery. It is suggested that the fees be increased to raise cost recovery to 100%, which would result in a 1.7% increase.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
134
16 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Planning
The Planning Department is responsible for land use planning and zoning. The department reviews applications for development permits, provides public information, maintains the General Plan, Climate Action Plan, and other planning documents, and enforces zoning regulations. Department staff process applications for zoning entitlements, and drafts and revise zoning regulations. Planning Department staff supports the Open Space Committee, Economic Development Committee and Sustainability Commission and represents the Town on the Marin Climate and Energy Partnership.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with the Planning Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of Planning Services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for Town Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. Many fees also contain a deposit aspect to allow for more precise accounting of costs on a project by project basis. This fee format allows for the establishment of flat fee amounts for aspects of services that do not vary greatly and utilizes deposits for service aspects that do vary. The analysis found that there are services whose current fees are currently set above and below the full cost of providing service. It is recommended that the Town set most Planning Services fees at or near 100% cost recovery for most fees as detailed in Appendix C, with some specific fees set to retain subsidies. As a result, there would be an increase to 22 fees, a decrease to 5 fees, 2 fees would remain as currently set, and 27 new fees would be added.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
135
17 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Recreation
The Recreation Department is responsible for developing and administering programs and services that enrich lives and help meet social, recreational, and wellness needs of youth, families and older adults through direct and contract programs.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with the Recreation Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of most Recreation programs encompassed facility rentals, park rentals, tennis rentals, and other recreation services. The fee for use for government owned facilities and property can be set discretionally by the Town. The cost of acquisition, maintenance, repair, and upgrade to the Town and subsequently the community is offset through rental or use fees. As such these fees should be set using the knowledge of activity use for the facilities, policy desires of the Town, and market factors when desirable. It is generally accepted that some Recreation programs provide a measure of public benefit to the residents and Town as a whole. In addition, cities generally want to ensure that their programs and services remain affordable to the community at large, and that the programs remain competitive with surrounding jurisdictions. It is recommended that the Town would increase 38 of the existing fees, a decrease of 2 fees, and 4 fees would remain the same for an average fee change of 1% as detailed in Appendix C.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
136
18 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Police
The Twin Cities Police Authority is administered under a joint powers authority to provide police services to San Anselmo, Corte Madera and Larkspur. The agency is governed by the Police Council, comprised of two members from each of the City/Town Councils of San Anselmo, Corte Madera and Larkspur.

Analysis
The fees listed under Police are primarily penalties meant to deter undesirable activities. The Town has suggested no change in fees as detailed in Appendix C.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
137
19 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered
Below are the total allowable costs that may be recovered through User Fees; however, only a percentage of the total allowable cost is realized as staff not only works on services related to User Fees, but also works on an array of other Town functions during the operational hours of the Town. The amounts listed below will not reconcile to Town budgets as costs that should not be included in overhead for personnel in the application of determining fully burdened hourly rates were excluded. Examples of these costs are capital, debt, monetary transfers, contract costs, and any other costs that is charged directly to the service requestor.

Town of San Anselmo - User Fee
Overhead Rate Calculations
Department
Salary and
Benefits
Department
Operations &
Administration
Direct
Overhead %
Indirect
Allocation %
01: ADMINISTRATION 840,547 266,748 31.7% 0.0%
01: LIBRARY 435,833 186,124 42.7% 39.0%
01: PLANNING 291,252 79,250 27.2% 39.2%
01: PUBLIC WORKS AND BUILDING 1,503,638 935,182 62.2% 34.3% 01: RECREATION 225,861 36,000 15.9% 40.5%
19: ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND 227,912 40,100 17.6% 35.2%
21: RECREATION 690,783 688,408 99.7% 26.0%
27: LIBRARY TAX FUND 210,994 54,970 26.1% 51.8%
31: ISABEL COOK COMMUNITY CENTER 12,430 54,200 436.0% 24.5% 34: ROBSON HOUSE 12,319 19,421 157.7% 45.5%
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
138
20 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix B – Fully Burdened Hourly Rates
Below are fully burdened hourly rates of staff positions that provide for the services detailed in Appendix C. The FBHRs were used to determine the full cost of each service. They include the salary and benefit costs for each position as well as all applicable overhead amounts for each position. For positions in central service departments, such as the Town Clerk and Finance, what is shown is the salary and benefit rate only, as the overhead of central service departments is recovered through the cost allocation plan. When a central service department position works on a fee or project in the purview of an operating department, the overhead rates of the operating department (shown in Appendix A) will be applied to that central service positions’ salary and benefit rate for full cost recovery. For any user fee service request that is outside the scope of the fees detailed in Appendix C, or for services for which there is no fee currently set, the Town can charge up to the full cost of the FBHR for personnel involved.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
139
21 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Town of San Anselmo - User Fee
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Department Position
Fully Burdened
Hourly Rate
Position Rates
01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Accounting and Benefits Technician 86.96 01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Administrative Services Technician 67.85 01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Finance/Administration Services Director 134.94 01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Town Clerk 66.55
01: ADMINISTRATION Admin - Town Manager 156.34
01: LIBRARY Library - Lead Library Assistant 84.76
01: LIBRARY Library - Librarian I 88.03
01: LIBRARY Library - Library Assistant 80.00
01: LIBRARY Library - Town Librarian 185.72
01: PLANNING Planning - Assistant Planner 93.38
01: PLANNING Planning - Planning Director 166.15
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Administrative Assistant II 83.19 01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Assistant Engineer 114.23
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Assistant Public Works Director 183.35 01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Building Inspector 132.49
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Building Official 183.33
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Maintenance Supervisor 132.86
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Maintenance Worker 1 82.13
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Public Works Director 233.15
01: PUBLIC WORKS PW - Senior Maintenance Worker 112.96
01: RECREATION Rec - Administrative Assistant II 78.73
01: RECREATION Rec - Community Services Director 126.51 19: ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND Fund 19 - Assistant Public Works Director 127.75 21: RECREATION Fund 21 - Recreation Coordinator I 117.58 21: RECREATION Fund 21 - Recreation Coordinator II 124.85 21: RECREATION Fund 21 - Recreation Supervisor 128.41
27: LIBRARY TAX FUND Fund 27 - Lead Library Assistant 81.76 27: LIBRARY TAX FUND Fund 27 - Librarian II 104.58
27: LIBRARY TAX FUND Fund 27 - Library Assistant 88.15
31: ISABEL COOK COMMUNITY CENTER Fund 31 - Maintenance Supervisor 406.91 34: ROBSON HOUSE Fund 34 - Maintenance Supervisor 228.67 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
140
22 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis
The following tables provide the results of the analysis, resulting full cost recovery amount, and recommended fees. For fees in which the full cost, existing fee and suggested fee is listed as “NA”, the amount or percentage was not calculable based on cost data or variable fee structure. This is most common when either the current or the suggested fee includes a variable component that is not comparable on a one to one basis, a full cost was not calculated (for penalties and fines), or when there is not a current fee amount to compare against.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
141
23 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Finance & Administration
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Photocopies $0.20 per page
Document with State requirements are charged per State Mandate NA NA $0.20 $0.00
2 Returned check charge $25.00 per incident NA NA% $25.00 $0.003 Certification New $33.27 40% $20.00 NA4 Appeals - Planning Applicant $504.00 $2,766.33 10% $2,500.00 $1,996.005 Appeals - Non-Applicant New $2,766.33 71% $800.00 NA6 Proof of Residency/Living Certification New $16.64 10% $15.00 NA7 Business License Fees:8 Transfer Fee $20.00 $22.62 12% $20.00 $0.009 Business License Penalty 10% per month Max. 50% NA NA 10% $0.0010 Duplicate Business License $5.00 $16.96 12% $15.00 $10.0011 Gross receipts:12 $0 - $7,500 $15.00 NA NA $15.00 $0.0013 $7,501 - $15,000 $30.00 NA NA $30.00 $0.0014 $15,001 - $25,000 $45.00 NA NA $45.00 $0.0015 $25,001 - $50,000 $60.00 NA NA $60.00 $0.0016 $50,001 - $100,000 $100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.0017 $100,001 - $250,000 $150.00 NA NA $150.00 $0.0018 $250,001 - $500,000 $300.00 NA NA $300.00 $0.0019 $500,001 - $750,000 $450.00 NA NA $450.00 $0.0020 $750,001 - $1,000,000 $600.00 NA NA $600.00 $0.0021 $1,000,001 - $2,000,000 $800.00 NA NA $800.00 $0.0022 $2,000,001 - $3,000,000 $1,200.00 NA NA $1,200.00 $0.0023 $3,000,001 - $4,000,000 $1,500.00 NA NA $1,500.00 $0.0024 $4,000,001 - $5,000,000 $2,100.00 NA NA $2,100.00 $0.0025 $5,000,001 - $10,000,000 $3,000.00 NA NA $3,000.00 $0.0026 $10,000,001 - $25,000,000 $4,500.00 NA NA $4,500.00 $0.0027 $25,000,000 - and over $4500 + .01% NA NA $4500 + .01% $0.0028 Hotels/Motels/Inns $17.00 per unit NA NA $17.00 $0.0029 Rental of one or more dwelling units or guest rooms within a rooming house, boarding house, single family dwelling, apartment, condominium, houseboat, or other residential structure containing guest rooms or dwelling units $17.00 per unit NA NA $17.00 $0.00
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 142
24 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Finance & Administration
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 30 General contractors and subcontractors $30.00 per quarter NA NA $30.00 $0.0031 General contractors and subcontractors $100.00 per year NA NA $100.00 $0.0032 Auctioneers $50.00 per day NA NA $50.00 $0.0033 Peddlers, solicitors $25.00 per day NA NA $25.00 $0.0034 Peddlers, solicitors $150.00 per quarter NA NA $150.00 $0.0035 Peddlers, solicitors $500.00 per year NA NA $500.00 $0.0036 Circuses or carnivals $400.00 first day NA NA $400.00 $0.0037 Circuses or carnivals $300.00 per additional day NA NA $300.00 $0.0038 Commercial & still film permits (public property) : 1-3 persons $100.00 per day NA NA $100.00 $0.0039 Commercial & still film permits (public property) : 4-6 persons $200.00 per day NA NA $200.00 $0.0040 Commercial & still film permits (public property) : 7-9 persons $300.00 per day NA NA $300.00 $0.0041 Commercial & still film permits (public property) : 10 + persons $400.00 per day NA NA $400.00 $0.0042 Commercial & still film permits (private property): 1-3 persons $50.00 per day NA NA $50.00 $0.0043 Commercial & still film permits (private property): 4-6 persons $100.00 per day NA NA $100.00 $0.0044 Commercial & still film permits (private property): 7-9 persons $150.00 per day NA NA $150.00 $0.0045 Commercial & still film permits (private property): 10+ persons $200.00 per day NA NA $200.00 $0.0046 Taxicabs $60.00 per vehicle NA NA $60.00 $0.0047 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - less than 1/2 ton capacity $22.50 per vehicle NA NA $22.50 $0.0048 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - not exceeding 1 ton capacity $37.50 per vehicle NA NA $37.50 $0.0049 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - not exceeding 1-1/2 ton capacity $75.00 per vehicle NA NA $75.00 $0.0050 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - not exceeding 2 ton capacity $112.50 per vehicle NA NA $112.50 $0.0051 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - not exceeding 3 ton capacity $150.00 per vehicle NA NA $150.00 $0.0052 Trucks/vans/delivery vehicles - over 3 ton capacity $225.00 per vehicle NA NA $225.00 $0.0053 Christmas tree lots $45.00 per year NA NA $45.00 $0.0054 Commercial leased property $0.02 per sq ft. $50 minimum, $220 Maximum NA NA $0.02 $0.0055 Business located out of San Anselmo but use San Anselmo P.O. Box for business $50.00 per year NA NA $50.00 $0.00
56 Real estate broker in San Anselmo $100.00 per year plus $10 per desk NA NA $100.00 $0.0057 Real estate broker in San Anselmo $10.00 per desk NA NA $10.00 $0.0058 Real estate broker out of San Anselmo $150.00 per year NA NA $150.00 $0.0059 Omnibus (all other categories) $50.00 per year NA NA $50.00 $0.0060 Business License List $1.00 per page NA NA $1.00 $0.00 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 143
25 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Public WorksMiscellaneous Items
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Road Impact Fee 1% value of project NA NA 1.5% value of project 0.5%2 Tree Removal Fees:3 Heritage Tree &/or Undeveloped Parcel Tree $170.00 WE WILL WAIVE FEE IF PLANT 2 REPLACEMENT TREES $245.40 0% $245.00 $754 Street Tree $80.00 THIS IS THE COST FOR BOTH REMOVAL AND PLANTING OF A STREET TREE $166.31 28% $120.00 $405 After the fact - Tree or Heritage Tree Removal Fine New $2000 Maximum as determined by the Public Works Director NA NA $2,000.00 NA6 Encroachment Permit Fees:7 Minor work $100.00 7-1.02 - Permit for curb cut for driveway entrance or approach (Street Superintendent)7-1.08 – Adjustment and variance from driveway standards (City Engineer)7-3.02 – Street cut or excavation permits (Public Works)7-4.02 - Temporary street obstruction permits7-5.09 - Permits to construct sidewalk, walkway, and/or driveway from curb to property line (Public Works) $306.27 51% $150.00 $50
8 Major work (over $2,500) 4% value of project
7-1.02 - Permit for curb cut for driveway entrance or approach 7-1.08 – Adjustment and variance from driveway standards 7-3.02 – Street cut or excavation permits 7-4.02 - Temporary street obstruction permits7-5.09 - Permits to construct sidewalk, walkway, and/or driveway from curb to property line $59.93 NA 4% value of project $0
9 Sidewalks/Driveways - new & repair; debris or storage box $75.00 $231.27 57% $100.00 $2510 Revocable Encroachment Permit for structures in town right- of-way $170.00 $408.30 27% $300.00 $13011 Revocable Encroachment Permit for temporary use of town right-of-way (restaurant outdoor seating) $100.00 7-5.11-permit for amilbox inright of way $127.27 0% $127.00 $27 12 Plan Check-when applicable $90.00 per hour $114.23 NA Hourly Staff Rate NA ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 144
26 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Public WorksMiscellaneous Items
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 13 Fence Permit Fees:14 Fences within setbacks abutting street $95.00 $231.27 59% $95.00 $015 Stop Work Fee for working without a permit 3 times value of Public Works Permit Fee
Determined by PW Director NA NA
3 times value of Public Works Permit Fee
$0
16 Plan Check-when applicable $90.00 per hour $297.58 55% $135.00 $4517 Grading Permit Fees: UBC Appendix Chapter 33 Table A-33B18 100cy or less $75.00 $274.74 59% $112.00 $3719 101cy to 1,000cy $75.00 first 100 cPlus $17.50 for each add'l 100 cy $466.29 76% $112.00 $37 20 1,001cy to 10,000cy $232.50 first 1,000Plus $14.50 for each add'l 1,000cy $699.44 50% $348.00 $11621 10,001cy to 100,000cy $363.00 first 10,00Plus $66 for each add'l 10,000cy $932.58 63% $348.00 -$15 22 100,001 and above $957.00 first 100,0Plus $36.50 for each add'l 100,000cy $1,165.73 0% $1,165.00 $20823 Grading Plan Review Fees: UBC Appendix Chapter 33 Table A-33A24 100cy or less $75.00 $137.37 18% $112.00 $3725 101cy to 1,000cy $150.00 $233.15 3% $225.00 $7526 1,001cy to 10,000cy $200.00 $349.72 14% $300.00 $10027 10,001cy or more $200.00 for first 10,000cy $24.50 each add'l 10,000cy $466.29 36% $300.00 $10028 Grading permit fee for work without a permit 3 times value of Public Works Permit Fee
$500 minimum- determined by PW Director NA NA
3 times value of Public Works Permit Fee
$0
29 Water Wells - potable and landscape wells $114.00 $233.15 27% $171.00 $5730 Grading Permit Extension Fee New $158.17 5% $150.00 NA31 Sidewalk Maintenance Program - Administration Fees32 First $200 $30.00 $421.90 89% $45.00 $1533 $201 - $500 $30 plus 15% of amount over $200
$75 Max $488.33 91%
$45 plus 15% of amount over $200 ($100 Max)
$15
34 $501 - $1,500 $75 plus 10% of
amount over $500
$175 Max $554.77 86%
$75 plus 10% of amount over $500 ($200 Max)
$0
35 Over $1,500
$175 plus 5% of amount over $1,500
No Max $687.63 75%
$175 plus 5% of amount over $1,500
$0
36 Arborist Site Visit and Arborist Report New $205.00 0% $205.00 NA37 Street Cut Inspection New $386.16 48% $200.00 NA38 Street Crew Cost (Red Curb Painting) New $390.17 100% Fees Waived NA ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 145
27 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Public WorksMiscellaneous Items
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 40 Abandonment New $1,165.73 14%
$1000 min + # hours of consultant time
NA
41 Penalty fee for After The Fact permits New NA NA
3xpermit cost or $500 min. Determined by building official or DPW director NA
42 DPW- RED TAG FEE New NA NA
3xpermit cost or $500 min. Determined by building official or DPW director NA
43 Encroachment permit extension fee New $99.88 25% $75.00 NA44 Charging Interest on Abatements New $54.01 NA 1% Monthly NA 45 Oversize Vehicle Permit - Single 16.00 per trip $90 - Annual $756.40 98% $16.00 $046 Street Light Shield New $250.00 0% $250.00 NA47 Stormwater Violation Fees New per day NA NA $100-1ST VIOLATION / $200-2ND / $500-3RD, 4TH, ETC
NA
48 Block Party Fee New $133.27 NA Fees Waived NA
49 Extension Fee- For Permits Excluding Encroachment New $79.08 5% $75.00 NA50 Reactivation Fee New $137.37 27% $100.00 NA 51 Flatwork Permit - Small/Medium 95.00 $123.75 19% $100.00 $5 52 Flatwork Permit - Large 300.00 $329.65 9% $300.00 $0 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 146
28 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Public WorksMiscellaneous Items
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 53 Floodplain Development Permit New
7-11.403 Special flood hazard area development permit 7-11.402 – Review of required certifications for floodplain Development permits:(1) Certification required by Section 7-11.501(c)(1) and Section 7-11.504 (lowest floor elevations); (2) Certification required by Section 7-11.501(c)(2) (elevation or floodproofing of nonresidential structures); (3) Certification required by Section 7-11.501(c)(3) (wet floodproofing standard); (4) Certification of elevation required by Section 7-11.503(a)(3) (subdivisions and other proposed development standards); (5) Certification required by Section 7-11.506(b) (floodway encroachments); (6) "NON-CONVERSION AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHIN FLOOD HAZARD AREAS" recorded deed restriction, review by town attorney NA NA $100 deposit + hourly NA
54 Permit to place newsrack on public property New NA NA $100 deposit + hourly NA ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 147
29 Comprehensive User Fee Study
LibraryMiscellaneous Items
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Overdue Fines2 Books, Magazines, Audio Tapes, Compact Discs, Books on CD, MP3, Music CDs - Adult $0.30 per day $15 max. NA NA $0.25 ($10 Max) -$0.053 Books, Magazines, Audio Tapes, Compact Discs, Books on CD, MP3, Music CDs - Child $0.15 per day $7.50 max NA NA $0.10 ($5 Max) -$0.054 DVDs, Blu-Ray - Adult $1.00 per day $15 max. NA NA $0.50 ($14 Max) -$0.505 DVDs, Blu-Ray - Child $1.00 per day $15 max. NA NA $0.50 ($7 Max) -$0.506 Print Materials7 Books lost or damaged beyond use Actual Cost NA NA Actual Cost $0.008 Processing Fee $5.00 $80.00 94% $5.00 $0.009 Books missing supplement (like map or CD) $3 - $6 NA NA $3 - $6 $0.0010 Damage (ink markings, stains, etc.) $4.00 NA NA $4.00 $0.0011 Audio Visual Materials12 Lost or Damaged A/V Case $3 - $7 NA NA $3.00 - $7.00 $0.0013 Lost or Damaged A/V Disc $7.00 per disc NA NA $8.00 $1.0014 Lost or Damaged A/V Insert $3 - $7 or replacement cost
NA NA $3.00 - $7.00 $0.00
15 Inter-Library Loan Fees:16 Link + $1.00 ($15 Max) per day $115 Replacement NA NA $1.00 ($15 Max) $0.0017 ILL - Other $5.00 per request Postage may apply $5.00 0% $5.00 $0.0018 Other Fees19 Library Card Replacement $1.00 per card $13.46 93% $1.00 $0.0020 Photocopies/Computer Printing Black and White $0.20 per page $0.20 0% $0.20 $0.0021 Photocopies/Computer Printing Color $0.20 per page $0.75 0% $0.75 $0.5522 Take & Make Kits New per day $50 Fee if item is returned to other library
NA NA $1.00 ($10 Max) NA
23 Museum Passes $2.00 ($10 Max) per day NA NA $2.00 ($10 Max) $0.00 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 148
30 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Building
# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Fee for Building Permit Plan-Check 65% of permit fee plan check beyond 2 submittals @ staff hr rate NA NA 65% of permit fee $0 2 Stop Work Fee for working without a permit; retroactive permit penalty fee Determined by Bldg Official Up to 3 times value of Permit; (Minimum $500) NA NA Up to 5 times value of Permit; (Minimum $500) $0 3 Energy Fees - projects affecting heated space 15% of Bldg Permit Fee NA NA 15% of Bldg Permit Fee $0 4 Code Compliance Fee $192.50 $1,263.28 77% $288.00 $965 Plumbing Permit 15% of Bldg Permit fee or $130 if not associated w/other work NA NA 15% of Bldg Permit fee or $150 if not associated w/other work $20
6 Electrical Permit 15% of Bldg Permit fee or $130 if not associated w/other work NA NA 15% of Bldg Permit fee or $150 if not associated w/other work $20
7 Mechanical Permit 10% of Bldg Permit fee or $130 if not associated w/other work NA NA 15% of Bldg Permit fee or $150 if not associated w/other work $20
8 Demolition Permit $150.00 $357.42 37% $225.00 $759 Swimming Pool Permit $500.00 $598.00 0% $598.00 $9810 Spa/Hot Tub Permit $200.00 $299.42 0% $299.00 $9911 Photo-voltaic System Permit $200.00 $536.12 53% $250.00 $5012 Water Heater Replacement Permit $130.00 $140.96 8% $130.00 $0 13 Furnace Replacement Permit $130.00 $140.96 8% $130.00 $014 Re-Roof Permit Residential $150.00 $174.09 14% $150.00 $015 Re-Roof Permit Commercial Bldg Permit Fee NA NA Bldg Permit Fee $016 Technology Fee 3% of Bldg Permit fee NA NA 8.8% of Bldg Permit fees 5.8% 17 Training Fee 2% of Bldg Permit fee NA NA 3% of Bldg Permit fee $0 18 Permit Administrative Fee (change of owner, contractor, arch/engr.) $31.00 $83.19 63% $31.00 $019 Window replacement (not associated with other work) $150.00 $266.28 16% $225.00 $7520 Minor Bathroom Remodel Permit Fee $400.00 OTC $15,000 max. value of project $647.82 7% $600.00 $20021 Minor Kitchen Remodel Permit Fee $600.00 OTC $25,000 max. value of project $805.73 0% $805.00 $205 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 149
31 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Building
# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 22 Plan Checks:23 Plumbing Plan Check 15% of Bldg Permit Fee or 65% of Plumbing Permit Fee if work not associated with Bldg Permit ($25 min) NA NA 15% of Bldg Permit Fee or 65% of Plumbing Permit Fee
$0
24 Electrical Plan Check 15% of Bldg Permit Fee or 25% of Electrical Permit Fee if work not associated with Bldg Permit ($25 min) NA NA 15% of Bldg Permit Fee or 25% of Electrical Permit Fee
$0
25 Mechanical Plan Check 10% of Bldg Permit Fee or 65% of Mechanical Permit Fee if work not associated with Bldg Permit ($25 min) NA NA 10% of Bldg Permit Fee or 65% of Mechanical Permit Fee
$0
26 Pool Plan Check $325.00 65% of Pool Permit fee $429.05 1% $425.00 $10027 Spa/Hot Tub Plan Check $130.00 65% of Spa/Hot Tub $429.05 55% $195.00 $6528 Plan Checks after 2 Plan Checks Hourly rate Consultant Fee $549.98 NA Consultant Fee $029 Plan Check for revisions after permit issued Hourly rate time charged at hrly Bldg Official rate and an add'l hour for each submittal. Minimum one hr per submittal. $183.33 0% $183.33 NA
30 Staff Hourly Rate:31 Building Official $105.00 per hour $183.33 0% $183.33 $7832 Building Inspector $95.00 per hour $132.49 0% $132.49 $37 33 Street Bond Determined by Public Works
Director
NA NA
Determined by Public Works Director
$0
34 Gross Receipts Tax on all projects done by a contractor $0.50 per $1,000 valuation NA NA $0.50 $0 35 Seismic Fee - State fee on all residential and commercial work $0.10 per $1,000 valuation NA NA $0.10 $0 36 Green Building Fee $1.00
per $25,000 valuation
NA NA $1.00 $0
37 Residential Resale Reports:38 Single Family Residence $200.00 $805.73 63% $300.00 $10039 Multi-Family Residences $200 + $25 each add'l unit $1,121.55 73% $300 +$50 each add/t unit $10040 Failure To Obtain Report 1X Report Fee NA NA 1X Report Fee NA 41 Watercourse Permit New $540.22 63% $200.00 NA42 Floodplain Development Permit New $408.25 76% $100.00 NA43 Lot Line(Property Line Adjustment) New NA NA $1000 Deposit NA ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 150
32 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Building
# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 44 Well Permit New $225.99 0% $225.00 NA
45 Reinstatement of Building Permit Fee 50% of bulding permit fee NA NA 50% of bulding permit fee $0 46 Extension of Building Permit Fee New $112.46 11% $100.00 NA47 Penalty fee for After The Fact permits New NA NA Up to 5 times value of Permit; (Minimum $500)
NA
48 Flood Gate Buidling Permits New NA NA Fees Waived NA 49 Admin Assistant II New per hour $83.19 0% $83.19 NA
50 Public Works Director New per hour $233.15 0% $233.15 NA 51 Assistant Public Works Director New per hour $183.35 0% $183.35 NA 52 Assistant Engineer New per hour $114.23 0% $114.23 NA 53 Maintenance Supervisor New per hour $132.86 0% $132.86 NA 54 Maintenance Worker I New per hour $82.13 0% $82.13 NA 55 Senior Maintenance Worker New per hour $112.96 0% $112.96 NA 56 Construction Inspector New per hour $365.36 0% $365.36 NA ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 151
33 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Minimum Value Maximum Value Base Rate Plus $$ For every

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.001.00 3,999.00 125.00 0.00 0.00
4,000.00 24,999.00 125.00 14.50 1,000.00
25,000.00 49,999.00 450.75 10.60 1,000.0050,000.00 99,999.00 715.75 7.50 1,000.00 100,000.00 499,999.00 1,090.75 6.10 1,000.00500,000.00 999,999.00 3,530.75 5.25 1,000.00 1,000,000.00 and above 6,165.75 4.14 1,000.00
Minimum Value Maximum Value Base Rate Plus $$ For every

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.001.00 3,999.00 127.17 0.00 0.00
4,000.00 24,999.00 127.17 14.75 1,000.00
25,000.00 49,999.00 458.59 10.78 1,000.0050,000.00 99,999.00 728.19 7.63 1,000.00 100,000.00 499,999.00 1,109.71 6.21 1,000.00500,000.00 999,999.00 3,592.12 5.34 1,000.00 1,000,000.00 and above 6,272.93 4.21 1,000.00
Building Valuation Table
Suggested (All New Construction)
Building Valuation Table
Current (All New Construction)
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 152
34 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Planning
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge/
Deposit Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Planning Commission Action Applications: Annexation $1,200.00 Deposit Variable NA $10,000.00 $8,8002 Planning Commission Action Applications: General Plan Amendment $1,200.00 $3,794.06 0% $3,794.00 $2,5943 Planning Commission Action Applications: Rezoning $1,200.00 $3,794.06 0% $3,794.00 $2,5944 Planning Commission First Application/Hearing $1,200.00 $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 $9255 Planning Commission Action Applications: Use Permit $1,200.00 $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 $9256 Planning Commission Action Applications: Variance $1,200.00 $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 $9257 Planning Commission Action Applications: Subdivision $1,200.00 $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 $9258 Planning Commission Action Applications: Parcel Split $1,200.00 $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 $9259 Planning Commission Action Applications: Lot Line Adjustment $1,200.00 $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 $92510 Planning Commission Action Applications: Illuminated Sign Review $1,200.00 $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 $925
11 Planning Commission Action Applications: FAR Exception. $1,200.00 $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 $92512 Each additional application $500.00 $130.43 0% $130.00 -$37013 Minor Exception $238.00 $223.82 0% $223.00 -$1514 Administrative Lot Merger $238.00 $306.23 0% $306.00 $6815 Planning Director - Residential Design Review $360.00 $913.33 0% $913.00 $55316 Planning Director - Commercial Design Review $600.00 $913.33 0% $913.00 $31317 Administrative Sign Review, conforming $119.00 $47.06 0% $47.00 -$7218 Certificates of Compliance $1,200.00 Deposit plus 25% overhead Variable NA $2,500.00 $1,30019 Initial Study & Negative Declarations (for first 16 hours of staff time In-House) $1,920.00 Deposit Plus 25% overhead on consultant costs Variable NA $6,000.00 $4,08020 Environmental Impact Reports Consultant cost + 20% Variable NA Consultant cost + 25% 5%21 Peer Reviews Consultant cost + 20%
Variable NA
Consultant cost + 25% 5%
22 Hourly Fee $119.00 $130.43 0% $130.00 $1123 Development Standards No charge $23.35 100% No charge $024 General Plan maintenance 10% of application fees
NA NA 4% of Building
Permit fees -6%
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 153
35 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Planning
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge/
Deposit Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 25 Technology fee
5% of application fees
NA NA 8.8% of Bldg
Permit fees 3.8%
26 Training fee
5% of application fees
NA NA
5% of application fees
0%
27 Additional Planning Deposit and Research Fee $119.00 per hour $130.43 0% $130.00 $1128 Photocopies, per page (State requirement documents are charged per State Mandate) $0.25 $0.20 0% $0.20 $029 Excavation/grading Permit SAMC Sec. 9-18.08 New $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 NA30 Review of R-1-H Precise Development Plan (PC) SAMC Sec. 10-

3.1105
New $3,534.81 0% $3,525.00 NA
31 Sign program SAMC Sec. 10-9.1103 New $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 NA32 Signs which are part of a project necessitating design review by the Planning Commission SAMC Sec. 10-9.409 New $130.10 0% $130.00 NA33 Planning Commission requests for reasonable accommodation SAMC Sec. 10-10.03
New $130.10 0% $130.00 NA
34 Planning Director requests for reasonable accommodation SAMC Sec. 10-10.03
New $436.11 0% $436.00 NA
35 Move Building SAMC Sec. 9-6.01 New $2,125.24 0% $2,125.00 NA36 Additional Public Hearing New $1,736.12 0% $1,736.00 NA37 Zoning ordinance amendment SAMC Sec. 10-3.803 New Deposit plus 25% overhead Variable NA $10,000.00 NA38 Preliminary or Specific Planned Development District SAMC Sec. 10-3.904
New $4,105.03 0% $4,105.00 NA
39 Final Map (if dedications are involved) SAMC Sec. 10-2.603 New Deposit plus 25% overhead Variable NA $5,000.00 NA40 R-1-H Development Plan Meeting with Open Space Committee SAMC Sec. 10-3.1102
New $1,074.34 0% $1,074.00 NA
41 Tentative parcel and tract map and final parcel and tract maps – Planning Director SAMC Sec. 10-3.1201 2,000.00 Plus $2,000 deposit to cover consultant and 25% overhead $399.30 0% $399.00 -$1,601.0042 Condtional Use Permit Planning Director SAMC Sec. 10-3.1303 New $913.33 0% $913.00 NA ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 154
36 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Planning
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge/
Deposit Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 43 Notice of public hearing - publication in newspaper SAMC Sec. 10-3.1602
New plus additional actual cost $166.15 0% $166.00 NA
44 Renewal of a discretionary action SAMC Sec. 10-3.1608 New $130.10 0% $130.00 NA45 Applications and determinations of unmergers (Public Works or Council) SAMC Sec. 10-3.273 New Deposit Variable NA $2,000.00 NA46 Application for expanded telecommunication facilities Administrative [future permit] New plus $10,000 deposit to cover consultant cost plus 25%
$1,432.61 0% $1,432.00 NA
47 Application for design review/use permit for telecommunication facilities (Planning Commission) New plus $10,000 deposit to cover consultant cost plus 25%
$3,012.37 0% $3,012.00 NA
48 Application for density bonus SAMC Sec. 10-11.050 Administrative New $892.60 0% $890.00 NA49 Remove deed restriction New Plus actual recording cost $332.31 0% $332.00 NA50 Residential chicken-keeping permit SAMC Sec. 5-1.05 New $93.38 100% $0.00 NA51 PreApplication Meeting New Plus applicant pays $100 to Ross Valley Fire Department $633.00 53% $300.00 NA
52 Review of Home Occupation Application New $23.35 100% $0.00 NA53 Review of Use Proposal or Business License Application New $23.35 100% $0.00 NA54 Penalty for work without a permit New NA NA 1x Application Fee NA55 Remove deed restriction to allow a second unit New Plus actual recording cost $166.15 100% $0.00 NA56 PreApplication Meeting - Commercial Uses New $633.00 100% $0.00 NATown Attorney costs will be passed on directly to applicant as needed.ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS: Fees charged by outside agencies for review/process of environmental documents will be charged to the applicant in addition to the fees herein.

ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 155
37 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Recreation
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Administrative Rates2 Administrative Registration Fee $6.00 per class $6.00 0% $6.00 $0.003 Security deposit 250.00 Deposit NA NA $250.00 04 Tennis Key Fees:5 Resident (R): Full Year $30.00 NA NA $35.00 $5.006 Resident (R): Jul-Dec $20.00 NA NA $25.00 $5.007 Non-Resident (NR): Full Year $80.00 NA NA $85.00 $5.008 Non-Resident (NR): Jul-Dec $50.00 NA NA $55.00 $5.009 Commercial Dog Walker Permit (Annual) $100.00 NA NA $105.00 $5.0010 Sign Fees11 Hub Sign $95.00 per week NA NA $105.00 $10.0012 Tunstead Street Banner $250.00 per week NA NA $250.00 $0.0013 Sir Francis Drake Street Banner $325.00 per week NA NA $325.00 $0.0014 Facility Rental Fees - Picnic & Park Areas 3 Hour Minimum Rental15 Memorial Park - Small Picnic Area - R $24.00 per hour NA NA $28.00 $4.0016 Memorial Park - Small Picnic Area -NR $27.00 per hour NA NA $30.00 $3.0017 Memorial Park - Large Picnic Area - R $34.00 per hour NA NA $38.00 $4.0018 Memorial Park - Large Picnic Area - NR $40.00 per hour NA NA $43.00 $3.0019 Memorial Park - Large Picnic Area - Inflatable Jumper Fee $30.00 NA NA $40.00 $10.0020 Robson Park - Upper Picnic Area - R $25.00 per hour NA NA $28.00 $3.0021 Robson Park - Upper Picnic Area - NR $32.00 per hour NA NA $35.00 $3.0022 Robson Park - Lower Picnic Area - R $30.00 per hour NA NA $33.00 $3.0023 Robson Park - Lower Picnic Area - NR $42.00 per hour NA NA $45.00 $3.0024 Creek Park Picnic Area - R $35.00 per hour NA NA $38.00 $3.0025 Creek Park Picnic Area - NR $45.00 per hour NA NA $48.00 $3.0026 Elders Garden - R $12.00 per hour NA NA $15.00 $3.0027 Elders Garden - NR $15.00 per hour NA NA $20.00 $5.0028 Creek Park Amphitheatre -Resident $45.00 per hour NA NA NA -$45.0029 Creek Park Amphitheatre - Non-Resident $60.00 per hour NA NA NA -$60.0030 Athletic Field Rental Fees - 2 Hour Minimum Rental31 Memorial Park - Single Baseball Field32 Group A $30.00 per hour NA NA $32.00 $2.0033 Group B $35.00 per hour NA NA $37.00 $2.0034 Group C $45.00 per hour NA NA $47.00 $2.0035 Memorial Park - Two Baseball Fields36 Group A $50.00 per hour NA NA $52.00 $2.0037 Group B $60.00 per hour NA NA $62.00 $2.00 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 156
38 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Recreation
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 38 Group C $75.00 per hour NA NA $77.00 $2.0039 Memorial Park - Three Baseball Fields40 Group A $75.00 per hour Non-Profit organizations, school related groups, community organizations (Scouts, Homeowners Assoc., Youth Sports Groups, religious organizations, etc.) NA NA $77.00 $2.00
41 Group B $85.00 per hour Private individuals, non-profit fundraising activities NA NA $87.00 $2.0042 Group C $110.00 per hour Commercial, for profit groups NA NA $115.00 $5.0043 Indoor Facilities44 ICC Kitchen, Lower Classrooms (2 hr min.) Resident $25.00 per hour NA NA $27.00 $2.0045 ICC Kitchen, Lower Classrooms (2 hr min.) Non-Resident $35.00 per hour NA NA $37.00 $2.0046 ICC Vista Room, (2 hr min.) Resident $30.00 per hour NA NA $32.00 $2.0047 ICC Vista Room, (2 hr min.) Non- Resident $45.00 per hour NA NA $47.00 $2.0048 Robson Harrington Meeting Room - Weekdays (2 hr min.)49 Group A $25.00 per hour Non-Profit organizations, school related groups, community organizations (Scouts, Homeowners Assoc., Youth Sports Groups, religious organizations, etc.) NA NA $30.00 $5.00
50 Group B $30.00 per hour Private individuals, non-profit fundraising activities NA NA $35.00 $5.0051 Group C $40.00 per hour Commercial, for profit groups NA NA $45.00 $5.0052 Robson Harrington Weekend Rental - First Floor (4 hr min.)53 Group A $70.00 per hour Non-Profit organizations, school related groups, community organizations (Scouts, Homeowners Assoc., Youth Sports Groups, religious organizations, etc.) NA NA $75.00 $5.00
54 Group B $75.00 per hour Private individuals, non-profit fundraising activities NA NA $80.00 $5.0055 Group C $90.00 per hour Commercial, for profit groups NA NA $95.00 $5.00 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 157
39 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Police
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Merchant Parking Permits $25.00 per year NA NA $25.00 $0.002 Overnight Parking Permits $50.00 per year NA NA $50.00 $0.003 Vehicle Impound Release $100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.004 Clearance/Citizen Letter $20.00 NA NA $20.00 $0.005 Report Copy fee $10.00 NA NA $10.00 $0.006 Fingerprinting "rolling" fee $20.00 NA NA $20.00 $0.007 Violations:8 Sign Retrieval $25.00 NA NA $25.00 $0.009 Parked without permit $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0010 Parked contrary to signs & markings $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0011 Improperly parked in marked space $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0012 No Parking/Stopping Red Zone $55.00 NA NA $55.00 $0.0013 No Parking Yellow/Green/White $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0014 Failure to Curb Wheels on 3% Grade $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0015 Parked in Excess of 72 Hours $155.00 NA NA $155.00 $0.0016 Parked in Excess of 2 Hours $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0017 Restricted Parking Only $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0018 Night Parking - 30 minute Limit 2AM-6AM $24.00 NA NA $24.00 $0.0019 Posted No Parking $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0020 Parked without 12' clearance $55.00 NA NA $55.00 $0.0021 No Parking on Private Property without consent $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0022 Expired Meter $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0023 No Parking on Crosswalk $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0024 No Parking Blocking Driveway $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0025 No Parking on Sidewalk $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0026 No Parking Wheelchair Ramp Access $290.00 NA NA $290.00 $0.0027 No Parking/Stopping in Fire Lane/Road $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0028 Parked in excess of 18" from curb $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0029 Blue Zone - Handicapped Only $290.00 NA NA $290.00 $0.0030 No Parking within 15' of Fire Hydrant $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0031 Parked on school grounds for sale $33.00 NA NA $33.00 $0.00 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 158
40 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Police
# Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 32 Parked in intersection, crosswalk, sidewalk, in front of a driveway, more than 18" from the curb or facing the wrong way $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0033 Double parked $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.0034 Overtime parking, illegally parked on school grounds, vehicle parked for sale on street, illegally parked, posted vehicle for sale and loading zone $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0.00
35 Tow Away Zone $50.00 NA NA $50.00 $0.0036 Expired tabs $84.00 NA NA $84.00 $0.0037 Vehicle for sale on street $111.00 NA NA $111.00 $0.0038 Parked on parkway $111.00 NA NA $111.00 $0.0039 Abandoned vehicle $278.00 NA NA $278.00 $0.0040 Parked in area for handicapped $290.00 NA NA $290.00 $0.0041 Blocking handicapped access ramp $290.00 NA NA $290.00 $0.0042 Handicapped parking $290.00 NA NA $290.00 $0.0043 Disabled crosshatch markings $290.00 NA NA $290.00 $0.0044 OVERSIZED VEHICLE FEES:45 Single trip permit $16.00 per trip NA NA $16.00 $0.0046 Repetitive trip permit $16.00 per trip max $90 for 6 mo period NA NA $16.00 $0.0047 Annual trip permit $16.00 per trip max of $90 for 1 yr period NA NA $16.00 $0.0048 Oversized Vehicle Escort Fee $216.12 per trip NA NA $216.12 $0.00 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT
2 159
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, California 92590-4856
800.755.6864 | Fax: 888.326.6864
951.587.3500 | Fax: 951.587.3510
www.willdan.com
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, California 92590-4856
800.755.6864 | Fax: 888.326.6864
951.587.3500 | Fax: 951.587.3510
www.willdan.com
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 7 - ATTACHMENT 2
160
Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 8.

FROM:

Sean Condry, P.E., CBO - Public Works and Building Director SUBJECT:

Water Conservation Efforts Town Wide and Memorial Park Field Renovation Project

RECOMMENDATION
a. That Council receive an update on Town water conservation efforts related to the drought and provide direction on future water conservation efforts; and
b. That Council provide direction to staff on the Memorial Park field replacement project, and associated water conservation efforts.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Water Conservation Efforts
With the low rainfall in the winter of 2020/21 Marin County and (most of California) was in the middle of a severe drought. Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) as of February 2021 declared initial stages of drought and stated this is the worst drought in over 140 years. On June 8, 2021, the state declared a drought emergency in Marin County. In 2021 MMWD had been requiring that water be reduced district-wide by 40%, with drip irrigation limited to two days per week and spray irrigation to one day per week. However, with the rains in October and December MMWD reservoirs filled up so there has been an incremental approach to modify or reduce some restrictions.

Public Works has been working to reduce the Town’s irrigation water usage at Town medians and parks, both through a reduction in spray irrigation, as well as reestablishing wells in Creek Park and Memorial Park that had not been in use since about 2005. The Creek Park well which was only connected to Creek Park is now connected to Town Hall, Imagination Park and Red Hill Median irrigation systems.

Linking Town Hall, Imagination Park and the Red Hill Median to the Creek Park well required installing new pipes and reconnecting older lines that were out of commission. The two wells at Memorial Park were thoroughly cleaned along with upgrades to the pumping, piping, and control system to improve the amount of water production and backup for domestic use during times of drought. These efforts have resulted in a reduction of MMWD domestic water use by about approximately 80% during the peak of the drought and over 30% for the entire year including non-drought months, see Attachment 1.

Memorial Park
Historically, Memorial Park used approximately 50% of the total domestic water used by the Town in any given year due to the water needs of the 3.2 acres of grass fields, which is similar to water usage for homes with lawns. In the summer months Memorial Park uses 13,000-15,000 gallons a day, seven days a week, which is equivalent to over 400,000 gallons per month. Last summer the fields and picnic area lawns had gone dormant due to the water use reduction to once a week watering while the Town was working on increasing well production. This had been a big concern due to its impact on Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 5 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™161
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 8.
summer recreation programs including soccer, which has over 750 players enrolled. However, based on feedback from Council and with the use of well and domestic water, the Town was able to water the fields 2-3 times each week.

The Memorial Park fields drainage and irrigation have not been upgraded in approximately 50 years. The fields are undulating with holes and mounds of dirt throughout. The drainage system has needed repair for ages along with a complete replacement of the irrigation system and fields. Last year the Town received a low bid of $454,360 from Marina Landscaping which the Town was prepared to move forward with; however, a drought was declared, and the project was delayed. Town Council directed staff to look at water conservation for the field replacement project to continue.

The Town hired Tamalpais Environmental Consultants (TEC)’s Aaron O’Brien, landscape architect Peter Arnold, and Siegfried Engineering’s Adam Merrill to study and come up with preliminary water savings and costs for various options.

Over the past 6 months TEC and the other consultants has investigated various options to reduce overall water usage along with a reduction of domestic water usage. In Attachment 2, the options examined by TEC include:

1. Installing a new irrigation system that would cut total water usage by about 25% (100,000 gallons during summer months) with a cost including new grass fields and drainage of $750,000.

2. Using recycled water from Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District which could meet all the needs of Memorial Park coming through the Mt. Tamalpais Cemetery with a cost of $5 to $10 million.

3. Recycled water delivery by trucking which could be used during drought in the summer months and would only meet about 50% or 200,000 gallons per month of the demand at a cost of $40,000/month or approximately $120,000 for 3 months of water.

4. Local greywater recycling which currently would only provide about 5,000 gallons a month for a cost of about $50,000.

5. The use of the 2 existing irrigation groundwater wells along with the addition of an existing monitoring well that combined could supply about 90,000 gallons/month for a total cost of about $55,000.

6. Rainwater Harvesting which could include installing a 20,000 gallons tank up to a 100,000 gallon tank under field one or the lower set of the tennis courts at a cost of $175,000 to $300,000, respectively.

The report in Attachment 2 gives a more in-depth overview of the above options. Staff along with the support of the consultants has come up with the recommended combination of options at the end of this report and the approximate water savings. All of the options include new grass fields, grading and irrigation. The options show overall water savings for in gallons and percent and the cost of the option. New irrigation is by far the largest actual water savings over any of the other options (except artificial turf) with an approximate 25% decrease in overall water usage.

The existing wells (Attachment 3) also significantly reduce domestic water use and if all three water wells were used the total domestic water use reduction would be approximately 23%. However, this intensity of use would also deplete the groundwater table. While the groundwater could be replenished if there were sufficient rain there could be a major impact to the groundwater table if a drought was over multiple years. Therefore, if groundwater wells are used staff would recommend using existing and new groundwater monitoring wells to track the depth to groundwater monthly and annually to monitor the impact to the groundwater table.

One of the biggest water savings would be the use of artificial turf which is recommended in Option 3 for field 1, Attachment 4. The option for artificial turf was initially rejected by the community during the Memorial Park rehabilitation planning stages but this was before the drought. New artificial turf could reduce overall water usage by up to 25%. However, it could still require some watering to keep it clean and maybe reduce its heat during hot days.

Another great advantage of artificial turf is the ability to use the field year-round for recreation. The transition at the playing surface between the real grass and the artificial turf may not be ideal and a fence may also be required to keep dogs off the area. While soccer fields could still be provided it would be for U-10 size soccer fields.

Also included in the options are rainwater/stormwater harvesting. The actual water savings using stormwater or rainwater will vary widely based on the size of the tank and when it’s raining. If a smaller size 20,000 gallon below ground tank is used, it would be able to help in between rains in the fall through winter months but not much in the summer. A larger Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 5 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™162
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 8.
100,000-gallon tank could also be installed at almost double the cost, but it too would only be about one weeks’ worth of water in the summer. The larger tank could help significantly in a dry winter/spring season collecting water from a big storm and then using the water for one to two months of irrigation during the transitional months of late Spring when there is the possibility of no rain.

The potential locations for the below-ground tanks are shown on Attachment 3. The 20,000 gallon tank has more versatility due to its size and potential locations could be out of the main field area allowing for the fields to be done first followed by the below-ground tank work. Suitable locations for the 20,000 gallon tank are adjacent to the tennis courts and below the Sunnyhills apartment complex which has numerous downspouts draining directly into the park. The two best locations for the 100,000 gallon below-ground tank would be field one or below the dilapidated tennis courts closer to Sunnyhills Drive. The tennis court needs resurfacing so putting the tank here could also be done in conjunction with resurfacing.

Attachment 5 shows the proposed 100,000 gallon tank below field 1. While this is a great option and has a major storm drain going adjacent to it which could fill the tank, the design time would most likely push the field renovation project into next fall.

In options 2 and 3 greywater systems are also included which are not in option 1 but the above ground 8,000 gallon tank in option 1 could be used for recycled water or greywater. While the water savings from the existing available grey water is minimal at 5,000 gallons per month or 1% of water needed in summer months staff recommends installing a system of piping that is grey water and recycled water ready. This recommendation is based on the potential for future development or remodel of existing multi-unit housing that could incorporate a grey water piping network that could be connected to the Memorial irrigation system in the future. A new above-ground tank and recycled water hookup would also allow for the use of trucked in water from the Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District during the peak summer months, but this would be an expensive option and not very green.

Summary
While all of the below options are viable, the costs to include below-ground tanks and artificial turf is fairly significant.

The below-ground water storage tank options add on 15-30% in cost for the 20,000 gallon tank and 100,000 gallon tank, respectively. The artificial turf option for only field 1 doubles the cost of installing grass, irrigation, and drainage for all three fields but technically has a 10 year payback. Option 1 which includes irrigation replacement, drainage and new fields along with using the existing wells and adding a new storage tank is the least expensive option but is also comparable to option 2 in cost to benefit ratio and it has a below-ground storage tank. All of the various items in these options may be mixed and matched.

Option 1 could be completed this fall with modifications to the existing design and specifications from last year. Option 2 could be completed in phases with the fields being done first along with the drainage, irrigation, and other piping for future rainwater and grey water collection. The 20,000 gallon below-ground tank could be designed and installed following the work in the fields sometime in the following year once the design is complete if authorized by Council.

Option 3 incorporating the artificial turf could be designed and completed this fall without the 100,000 gallon tank below field 1. However, the 100,000 gallon tank could be installed below the lower tennis courts as a phase 2 which would allow more time for design.

The Memorial Park fields and the park itself are highly used recreationally, leisurely and for community events by residents and visitors year-round. Public parks fill an important role for a community gathering space for residents and people who don’t have access to private outdoor space. Providing a public field with natural grass is a greener approach to having lawns as opposed to private lawns for residences. A NASA led study in 2005 found that grass lawns in the US cover 63,000 square miles and typically use 50-75% of the domestic water supply. With droughts becoming more frequent and the availability of clean drinking water limited, one way to conserve water would be to not allow grass lawns for private residences but provide shared community outdoor space with grass fields and other amenities.

Memorial Park Domestic Water Reduction
Option 1
Replacement of Existing Field with New Irrigation System and above ground storage tank Summer
Gal/m
Percent
reduction Cost
Cost per
gal/red.

Summer
Average
Annual use
Cost per
gal/red.

Annual
Town of San Anselmo Page 3 of 5 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™163
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 8.

Memorial Park Domestic Water Reduction
Option 1
Replacement of Existing Field with New Irrigation System and above ground storage tank Summer
Gal/m
Percent
reduction Cost
Cost per
gal/red.

Summer
Average
Annual use
Cost per
gal/red.

Annual
Description/Summer Peak 400,000 2,749,897
New grass fields, grading, irrigation -100,000 -25% $750,000 $7.50 -687,474 $1.09 Existing Rehabilitated Wells -60,000 -15% $20,000 $0.33 -412,485 $0.05 Add existing Well MW-2B -30,000 -8% $35,000 $1.17 -206,242 $0.17 Small 8,000 gallon above ground storage tank with new
controls (no stormwater or greywater) $120,000
Total MMWD Water Reduction -190,000 -48% $925,000 $4.87 -1,306,201 -$0.71 Option 2
Replacement of Existing Grass with New Wells and Small Graywater/Stormwater System Summer
Gal/m
Percent
reduction Cost
Cost per
gal/red.

Summer
Average
Annual use
Cost per
gal/red.

Annual
Description/Summer Peak 400,000 2,749,897
New grass fields, grading, irrigation -100,000 -25% $750,000 $7.50 -687,474 $1.09 Existing Rehabilitated Wells -60,000 -15% $20,000 $0.33 -412,485 $0.05 Add existing Well MW-2B -30,000 -8% $35,000 $1.17 -206,242 $0.17 Small stormwater and greywater systems -5,000 -1% $50,000 $10.00 8,593 -$5.82 Larger 20,000 gallon below ground storage tank with
new controls $175,000
Total MMWD Water Reduction -195,000 -49% $1,030,000 $5.28 -1,297,608 -$0.79 Option 3
Replacing 2/3 of the Existing Grass Area and adding 40,000 sq. ft of artificial turf.

Summer
Gal/m
Percent
reduction Cost
Cost per
gal/red.

Summer
Average
Annual use
Cost per
gal/red.

Annual
Description/Summer Peak 400,000 2,749,897
New grass fields, grading, irrigation -100,000 -25% $750,000 $7.50 -687,474 $1.09 New Artificial Turf -100,000 -25% $800,000 $8.00 -687,474 $1.16 Existing Rehabilitated Wells -60,000 -15% $20,000 $0.33 -412,485 $0.05 Add existing Well MW-2B -30,000 -8% $35,000 $1.17 -206,242 $0.17 Larger stormwater and greywater collection systems -20,000 -5% $125,000 $6.25 -137,495 $0.91 Install very large 100,000 gallon below ground storage
tank with pumps and controls. $300,000
Total MMWD Water Reduction -310,000 -78% $2,030,000 $6.55 -2,131,170 -$0.95

FISCAL IMPACT
If Council chooses to proceed with one of the above options, the fiscal impact will be approximately as shown in the Town of San Anselmo Page 4 of 5 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™164
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 8.

Cost column above. However, the selected option will be brought back to Council for ultimate approval and the engineers estimate will be included at that time. Funding for the above options will come from Measure A, Parks which has approximately $700,000 but any funding above this amount will need to be allocated from the general fund, Measure D or American Rescue Plan Act funds. Staff would like direction from Council on where funds should come from if over existing funds in Measure A, Parks.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The Town finds that discussing possible approaches to reducing water consumption in Town at Memorial Park is a preliminary discussion and does not constitute approval of a project. Therefore, conducting a CEQA analysis before the Council chooses a conservation option is premature. (CEQA Guidelines § 15002(e)). If such a discussion of water conservation options is considered a project, it is categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1, because it involves maintenance of existing public facilities involving negligible or no expansion of use. (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15301). None of the exceptions listed in CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply in this instance.

The modification of irrigation schedules will address San Anselmo’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030, specifically CAP Measure C-2, replace inefficient irrigation systems by reducing overall domestic water usage.

Town of San Anselmo Page 5 of 5 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™165
Sept.‐Dec. Water Consuption Comparison 2020 vs. 2021
Facility Percent of Total Water Use Averaged Over 2020‐2021 Water Use 2020 Water Use 2021 % change Town Hall 8% 142,868 71,060 ‐50%
ICC 8% 35,156 173,536 394%
Creek Park 1% 26,180 0 ‐100%
Imagination Park 1% 35,904 748 ‐98%
Memorial Park* 28% 750,493 0 ‐100%
Red Hill Median 43% 1,095,072 31,416 ‐97%
Robson House 10% 163,812 109,956 ‐33%
Total 100% 2,249,485 386,716 ‐83%
*Adjusted Memorial Park consumption due to a broken meter in 2020.A historical average from September through December of 2014 to 2016 was used instead.Gallons saved 1,862,769Water use reduced by ‐83% 8%
8% 1%
1%
43% 28%
10%
Percentage of Averaged Total Use Per Facility
Town HallICCCreek ParkImagination ParkMemorial Park*Red Hill MedianRobson House Data averaged for the periods from Sept thru Dec in 2020‐2021 Item 8 Attachment 1
Item 8 Attachment 1
166
Tamalp
ais
Environmental
Consultants
Sean Condry
Town Of San Anselmo
525 San Anselmo Ave.

San Anselmo, CA 94960
March 30, 2022
Subject: Evaluation of Irrigation Water Options for Grass Playing Fields at Memorial Park, San Anselmo, California.

This summary has been prepared by Tamalpais Environmental Consultants (TEC) and Edd Clark & Associates (ECA) to provide the Town of San Anselmo with an evaluation of water supply options for the playing fields at Memorial Park in the Town of San Anselmo (Town). The objective ofthis evaluation is to provide the Town with additional information related to the available irrigation water options in order to make an informed decision regarding the replacement of the grass at the playing fields. A summary of options and cost estimates are provided separately.

The playing fields at Memorial Park include over 3 acres of grass that require significant amounts of water to maintain. A figure showing the park and associated features is included in Figure 1. The Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) provides potable water for the fields and a new connection to their pipeline was completed in 2021. A variety of water sources can be used in the event that water is not available from the MMWD. Additional potential sources of water include recycled water (both long-term and short-term options), groundwater from existing and new wells, greywater, and rainwater harvesting. Each of these options is discussed in more detail in this report.

The existing fields and irrigation system are in relatively poor condition. The installation of a new irrigation system alone is estimated to use about 25% less water than the existing irrigation system for the same amount of grass. This would be a very significant savings over the current system and TEC recommends the installation of new irrigation and control systems at a minimum to use water as efficiently as possible. The current system uses over 100,000 gallons of water per week in the summer and water use can be higher than that in some conditions. The utilization of alternative water options can reduce the amount of water necessary from the MMWD by approximately 50% or more depending on the options chosen.

We have collected or reviewed information from the following sources:
• the ins,tallation of the two existing irrigation wells in the 1970s, • additional wells and groundwater pumping tests conducted in 2012 and 2013, • well drilling contractors,
• well maintenance and system installation contractors, • Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) personnel related to potable and recycled water options,
Tamalpais Environptental Consultants
32 Hill Ave., Fairfax, CA 94930 • phone (415) 456-5084
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
167
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
168
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
169
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
170
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
171
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
172
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
173
Appxoimate Scale in Feet
0 100’
Memorial Park
San Anselmo, California
N
Site Plan Tamalpais
Environmental
Consultants
Figure
1 Reference: GoogleEarth
Parking Lot Millenium
Playground
Pathway
Playing Fields
Rest
Rooms
Existing 8,000 Gallon
Concrete Tank Wells MW-1 and IR-2
Well IR-1
Meadows
Picnic Area
Existing Well
MW-2B
(not connected yet)
Alderney
MW-3
Pathway
Potential Stormwater
Collection
Proposed New Recycled
Water Connection For
Trucks (4”)
Potential New Tank Locations
Volume 8,000 to 20,000 gallons
Potential Greywater
Collection
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
174
Attachment 1 - Water Champions and Argall Plumbing
Cost Estimates
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
175

WATER CONSERVATION SYSTEM

INSTALLATION PROPOSAL
Created by:

Paul Mann, Water Champions
[email protected]
510-708-4065 or 833-3WATERS
Prepared for:

Aaron O'Brien
32 Hill Avenue
Fairfax, CA 94930
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
176

SUMMARY
Dear Aaron, 2/21/2022
Thank you for contracting Water Champions to conduct an analysis and provide a proposal for methods of capturing and reusing water for irrigating the Memorial Park balleld in San Anselmo.

As we are now in uncertain times of climate change, it appears that higher temperatures, drought, water scarcity, and rising municipal water prices will be among the new normal. We will need to engage new solutions to make our water go farther and create water security.

Capturing and recycling greywater and rainwater for the balleld are great alternatives to using potable water, and will conserve a substantial amount of potable water in the long run. With our solutions, the San Anselmo Parks and Recreation Department will better be able to maintain the beauty of the balleld with the water that would otherwise go down the drain, and enjoy a more sustainable way of keeping the grass green year-round.

We at Water Champions are pleased to provide the design for the installation of the ballpark's water conservation system. We specialize in implementing innovative solutions that capture, recycle, conserve and make water go farther. We pride ourselves in custom-designing and installing just the right solution for our customers and providing ongoing monitoring and support to ensure each system runs smoothly for years to come.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
177
On the following pages, I have outlined the current situation, opportunity, proposed solution, and primary system component options with approximate prices for your review.

Should you have any questions, comments, or concerns regarding this proposal, please feel free to contact me directly at 510-708-4065 or at [email protected].

We look forward to the hopeful installation of our solutions to help ensure long-term water sustainability, security and green abundance at the Memorial Park baseball eld! Regards,
PaulMann
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
178

WATER CAPTURE EVALUATION
Current Situation
The San Anselmo Memorial Park balleld is upgrading their irrigation system. In that process, their is discussion of redoing the three grass ballelds, either with natural grass or with turf.

The existing balleld will typically consume approximately 100,000 gallons of water per week for irrigating the three ballelds in the peak summer months. Currently, this water is provided through two wells on site, one 7,500 gallon above-ground concrete water tank, and potable water from the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD). Alternate water sources, such as recycled water delivery by truck or pipe have also been evaluated or used.

With the apparent ongoing drought, limited reservoir storage capacity in Marin, and possible restrictions and penalties that are or could be imposed by MMWD, a decision must be made whether to keep irrigating the grass currently on the ballpark, switch to articial turf, or make a different decision altogether that ensures long-term sustainability against ongoing drought.

Opportunity
The San Anselmo Memorial Park balleld has a series of storm water runoff pipes that run through the balleld, as well as along the perimeter of the park. While the exact volume of water could not be identied for this report, those familiar with the eld suggest that a high volume of water runs through them during the Winter months.

The Parkside pre-school and day care and gymnasium building rooftop is also a source of water.

The rooftop measures approximately 8,392 square feet and, as such, produces approximately Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
179
5,035 gallons of water per inch of rain. The downspouts on the west side of the building feed into a 12" storm water runoff pipe runs on the south side behind the tennis courts. Based on last year's 20 inches of rainfall, this would produce 100,700 gallons annually. This number could double to triple based on previous years and normal rain flow averages.

The San Anselmo Parks & Recreation Department also has water coming off its neighboring administrative building that houses the San Anselmo Parks & Recreation Department staff and various artists. The rooftop measures approximately 11,684 square feet and, as such, produces approximately 7,010 gallons of water per inch of rain. The majority of this rainwater feeds into a storm water runoff pipe that runs under the subsidized housing project, and the rest exits onto the surface concrete or asphalt. Based on last year's 20 inches of rainfall, this would produce 140,200 gallons annually. This number could double to triple based on previous years and normal rain flow averages.

Lastly, the pre-school has approximately 35 pre-schoolers and 5 teachers who wash their hands approximately 5 times daily throughout the year. The gymnasium has approximately 50 students who wash their hands approximately 2 times per day 5 days per week. Lastly, the San Anselmo Parks & Recreation Department has approximately 15 people who wash their hands 2 times per day 4 days a week. This produces, in total, approximately 4,050 gallons of greywater per month, as detailed in the graph below. As these facilities are open almost all year round, there is a potential annual production of approximately 48,600 gallons of greywater produced annually and predominantly on an even basis each month, even in the dry weather months, that could be recycled on-site into 100% germ-free, clear water for reuse on the balleld or back into the building's toilets for flushing.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
180
Proposed Solution
Per the schematic image below, we recommend a multi-tier approach to capturing and storing water for the balleld as follows:

1. Intercept the 12" storm water runoff pipe that runs between the skateboard park and the pre-school (as indicated below with a red line) and use a 280 micron vortex lter to spin off the clean water for storage. This pipe also contains the rainwater collected from the rooftop of the pre-school/gymnasium.

2. Capture the greywater from the two bathroom sinks and one cleanup sink in the pre-school Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
181
and run it into a Hydraloop water recycling system to process it to 100% germ-free, clear water. Output the clean water into the 12" storm water runoff pipe via a wye, just after the vortex lter and behind the south side of the tennis courts, for storage (as indicated below with a purple line). Note that the Hydraloop system also has pressurized ports that could be retrot to the toilets in the Parkside pre-school, daycare and gymnasium for flushing if desired.

3. Just after the wye, install a pump basin to pressurize the water and install a 3-way diverter that enables water to either be pumped into a below-ground cistern located at the east end of the tennis courts or diverted to pump up and into the existing above-ground concrete water tank, which would be daisy-chained to additional above-ground tanks for additional storage on the front northeast corner of the tennis courts.

4. The below ground cistern would have a pump with a line out (as indicated below with a green line) to replenish the concrete above-ground tank and daisy-chained above-ground tanks as needed to provide water to the ballpark irrigation system.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
182
Because the majority of water that could be used for irrigation will collect during the winter months when water can be collected from the rooftop and ground runoff, it is recommended the larger capacity of water storage the better. During the warmer months when this water may be used up, it can be augmented through the recycled water from the pre-school and gymnasium.

If necessary, additional greywater can be recycled from the San Anselmo Parks & Recreation Department building as a separate future project. In addition, recycled water can be delivered by Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
183
truck through a 3rd party from the San Rafael recycled water lling station or from nearby natural streams, such as the Russian River. If necessary, additional storm water runoff pipes could be accessed (there is an 18" pipe that runs in front of the tennis courts, a 10" pipe that runs under the HUD, a 24" pipe that runs through the middle of the balleld, and another 24" pipe that runs at the top of the balleld). Lastly, additional greywater from the bathroom near the Millennium Playground can be captured and recycled to clear water that can also feed into the water storage tanks.

Primary System Component Options
Based on the recommended conguration above, here are the options and costs for consideration:

1. Hydraloop H600 water recycling system - this NSF350 certied unit will capture the greywater from the pre-school sinks (and other sources if desired) and take it through a 6- stage cleaning process to output 100% germ-free, clear water that can be stored for irrigation. Click here to see a video of how the H300 (residential model) works and click here for the specs on the H600 commercial model recommended for this project. Approximate cost: $8,995 plus tax.

2. WISY Vortex Filter - this lter will intercept the 12" storm water drain pipe or, more likely, a 6" artery pipe off the 12" pipe and will lter out clean water for storage. Click here to see a video of how it works. Approximate cost: $938 plus tax.

3. Below-ground cistern - in the grass on the east end of the tennis courts, the area is 75 feet long, and 15 feet wide on one end and 22 feet wide at the other end. As such, there is the capacity to install a variety of sizes of tanks, either in concrete or in plastic:

1. Concrete cistern - By example, a 25,000 gallon concrete cistern would cost approximately $60,000 delivered, a 50,000 gallon concrete cistern would cost approximately $90,000 delivered, and a 119,000 gallon concrete cistern is the largest cistern we could t and would cost approximately $180,000 delivered.

2. Poly cistern - The largest poly tank we could t would be a 20,000 gallon tank that Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
184
measures 55' long x 8.4' wide x 8.9' high and would cost approximately $57,200 plus $7,700 delivery. Theoretically, we may be able to get two of these tanks in side-by-side and daisy-chain them.

4. Above-ground water tanks - based on the current 7,500 gallon concrete tank that measures 15' in diameter x 10' high, and a remaining 50' to the left of the tank to the bench and an additional 25' to the water fountain, there exists two primary options (note that we were not able to nd any manufacturers of concrete tanks):

1. High-density polyethylene tanks - by example, there is enough room to daisy-chain up to seven 5,000 gallon tanks that are 129" in diameter x 96" high at a cost of approximately $4.584 each, or six 10,000 gallon tanks that are 144" in diameter x 161" high at a cost of approximately $15,360 each.

2. Metal tanks - by example, there is enough room to daisy-chain up to ve 7,500 gallon metal tanks that have the same 15' diameter x 10' tall dimension as the existing concrete tank and would cost approximately $36,000 each.

Once primary system components have been selected, more exact water capture and reuse calculations can be provided, as well as a nal estimate that includes all parts, installation equipment, and labor will be assembled for your review.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
185
WHY CHOOSE WATER CHAMPIONS?
At Water Champions, we're passionate about saving water and ensuring our customers are exuberant about the quality and workmanship of the solutions that we install for them. That's why we take the time to constantly research and test for the most innovative and long-lasting water capture, reuse and conservation solutions possible to bring to you.

Our team are not only trained and experienced experts in installing the solutions we provide, but we also pride ourselves in providing customized, full-service services for you, including system design, permitting, nancing and annual system maintenance contracts.

When you work with Water Champions, you work with a team of environmentally-conscious individuals who are committed to enabling a future where water capture and recycling systems conserve huge amounts of water for every home and building in every community and help to create a green abundance to enjoy. Together, we are pioneering a water smart future we can all feel good about.

By purchasing our solutions, you too become a water champion and become part of the solution as we, together, reimagine water use and secure a more abundant, sustainable future. And, thinking on a global scale, 5% of our prots are donated to Water.org, a great charity that has empowered more than 38 million people with access to safe water or sanitation through affordable nancing in waterstressed areas around the world. With Water Champions, by saving water locally, you are also making a difference globally!
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
186
Date: WO#: 9959
To: Location:
(Isabel Cook School Location)
We propose to furnish labor and material to complete the following work:

Item # Cost
1 6,480.00
2 6,940.00
3 1,130.00
Total Job $ 14,550.00
QUALIFICATIONS: Materials to be used ABS DWV pipe and fittings copper and pex for water piping.

Opening, patching, excavation and backfilling of floors, walls & or ceilings to be done by others.

Sincerely,
Grier Argall
Grier Argall
President
Approved by: Date:

I hereby accept the above performed service or goods as being satisfactory and acknowledge that equipment has been left in good condition.

All complaints regarding workmanship or materials used must be reported within 3 days after completion of work done.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with an estimate to complete this work. If the above meets with your approval, please sign and date the form below and return to our office. 1000 Sir Francis Drake Blvd
San Anselmo, CA. 94960
Install exposed drain along wall in kids bathrooms serving hand sink for grey water, run drain under building and expose itself
Cut 1' slot in concrete from tank location 1' deep. Install one 3" gravity drain, one 1-1/2" PVC discharge and one 1" conduit to edge of retaining wall.

Patch concrete.

Description
Includes removal, dump runs.

GRIER ARGALL PLUMBING, INC.

P.O. Box 2723
San Anselmo, CA 94979
Phone (415) 457-0748 / Fax (415) 456-3929
Lic# 736901
Permit: $TBD
[email protected]

PROPOSAL
Reference: Hand wash sink drain to a tank beyond upper walkway past vista room entry.

Town of San Anselmo
1000 Sir Francis Drake Blvd
San Anselmo, CA. 94960
February 22, 2022
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
187
Attachment 2 – Geological Cross-Sections
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
188
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
189
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
190
Attachment 3 – Western Groundwater Surveyors Report
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
191

GROUNDWATER SURVEY REPORT

LOCATION
1000 Sir Francis Drake Blvd.

San Anselmo, CA 94960
CLIENT
Tamalpais Environmental Consultants
Aaron O’Brien
8733 Lakewood Drive Suite B
Windsor, CA 95492
707.837.6247
March 15, 2022
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
192
Table of Contents
Figure 1. SITE LOCATION AND SEISMOELECTRIC SOUNDING LOCATIONS

SUMMARY
Table 1. GROUNDWATER SURVEY RESULTS

INTRODUCTION

GEOLOGY

DATA ACQUISTION AND PROCESSING

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION
Table 3. INTERPRETED YIELD CATEGORIES

NEIGHBORING WELLS
Table 4. NEIGHBORING WELL LOG DATA

RECOMMENDATIONS
Appendix A. THE SEISMOELECTRIC SURVEY METHOD

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
193
San Fra
El Cerrito Ave
San Francisco Blvd
San Anselmo
Memorial Park
CAL1
1 2
3 4
5 6
8733 Lakewood Drive, Suite B
Windsor, CA 95492
Aaron O'Brien
Figure 1
Sounding Location
Map
Memorial Park, 1000 Sir
Francis Drake Blvd.,
San Anselmo, CA 94960
CREDITS: JR BROWN
03/07/2022
:

LEGEND
100 0 100 200 300 400 50
CLIENT'S PARCEL US Feet

SOUNDING
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
194
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
195

INTRODUCTION
The objective of the survey is to locate a source of groundwater, estimate (interpret) its depth, and (to the degree possible) estimate the permeability (yield) of the rock formation that contains the groundwater (aquifer). The groundwater, if found, will be produced by drilling a water well into the aquifer in order to serve the property.

Prior to field work WGS preformed a hydrogeologic assessment of the region including the property of interest. The hydrogeologic assessment included review of available geologic maps, topographic maps and well completion reports for nearby wells.

Selection of the testing (soundings) locations on the site take into consideration the hydrogeologic assessment, accessibility of well drilling equipment, County required setbacks for wells, interference from electrical distribution lines and testing conditions (soil depth).

Subsurface data for this survey was supplemented using the Seismoelectric method, which has the potential to provide the approximate depth and yield of subsurface water-bearing formations. This method is sometimes referred to as the Electro-Kinetic Survey (ESI) method.

GEOLOGY
Franciscan Complex Mélange (fsr)
The site geology is the Franciscan Complex, undivided central and coastal belts of sandstone. Mostly massive, brown and orange weathering, green to gray feldspathic wacke. A tectonic mixture of variably sheared shale and sandstone containing hard tectonic inclusions largely of greenstone, chert, graywacke, and their metamorphosed equivalents, plus exotic high-grade metamorphic rocks and serpentinite.

Qa
Alluvial pebble gravel, sand and clay of valley areas.

All of the geologic information is taken from geologic maps provided by government agencies and well reports registered with the State of CA. This information is used to provide geologic information relevant to this survey.

DATA ACQUISTION AND PROCESSING
Subsurface geophysical data was acquired using an AquaLocate GF6 Seismoelectric Survey System. This method works because electrical signals are often produced when seismic compression waves encounter water-saturated rocks. More details of this system and the basic theory of the Seismoelectric method are provided in Appendix A.

In order to record the electrical signals, four electrodes have to be inserted vertically into the ground and connected to the GF6 receiver. The electrodes are 1.0 meters long and constructed from steel with a copper sheath surrounding the steel core.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
196
Table 2. Detailed locations of Seismoelectric soundings Six seismoelectric soundings were recorded on the property. Locations are displayed in Figure 1 and detailed in Table 2. The locations of the sites were chosen by WGS and the Client. The data was processed using software that is proprietary to the GF6 Seismoelectric system.

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION
Although it is possible to interpret the depth to the top of the aquifer, the interpreted depth to the bottom is the more critical value. This is because the interpreted yields assume that the full thickness of the aquifer is used to produce water and that presenting the depth to the top would not provide a realistic estimate of the actual drill depth required in order to obtain the interpreted yield. Another reason for presenting the depth to the bottom of an aquifer is that the depth to the top of an aquifer can vary depending on the time of year and longer-term
weather conditions, as well as other wells
drawing water from the same aquifer. Thus,
because the depth to the top of an aquifer may
change due to the conditions described above,
a well that is drilled only a short distance into
an aquifer may have a yield that is more
susceptible to these changes. Additionally, a
cone of depression may occur around a well as
it is pumped, further reducing the yield of a
well that is only drilled for a short distance into
an aquifer. The cone of depression may be
more pronounced for wells drilled into low
permeability formations. However, if a
sufficient yield is obtained before the
interpreted bottom of the aquifer is reached
then it may be reasonable to stop drilling
before this depth is reached.

Latitude Longitude Sounding

37.98321° -122.56577° 1

37.98329° -122.56599° 2

37.98333° -122.56611° 3

37.9834° -122.56628° 4

37.98345° -122.56636° 5

37.98341° -122.56658° 6

37.98284° -122.56605° Well Calibration (IW-1)
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
197
San Fra
El
Cerrito Ave San Francisco Blvd
San Anselmo
Memorial Park
CAL11 2
3 4
5 6
8733 Lakewood Drive, Suite B
Windsor, CA 95492
Aaron O'Brien
Figure 1
Sounding Location
Map
Memorial Park, 1000 Sir
Francis Drake Blvd.,
San Anselmo, CA 94960
CREDITS: JR BROWN
03/07/2022
:

LEGEND
100 0 100 200 300 400 50
CLIENT'S PARCEL US Feet

SOUNDING
Neighboring
Well Logs
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
198
Because many factors influence the interpreted yield, including the method used to drill a well, in order to present the interpreted yields with accuracy that is realistic, the yield interpretation for each sounding is presented as one of a range of yields and is assigned an alphabetic label (category), as defined in the Table 3 (right).

NEIGHBORING WELLS
Table 4. Data obtained from neighboring well logs.

To best interpret the well drillers estimated gallons per minute (gpm) in the above table two notes should be made. First, the estimated gpm was determined by the driller after a short 2-4 hours test (typical) and would be better defined as a maximum short term pumping rate. So, the above stated gpm values likely overstate the gpm the well would produce over a longer 12- or 24-hour pumping period. Secondly, the estimated gpm in the above table were taken at the time the well was completed and do not account for seasonal or long-term changes in the aquifer that may have a negative impact on a wells production.

Neighboring Well Locations Drill Depth
(feet)
Drillers Estimate
(gpm)
Memorial Park 39 4
Memorial Park 45 7
Memorial Park 41 Monitoring
Memorial Park 36 Monitoring
Memorial Park 36 Monitoring
Memorial Park 45 Monitoring
Memorial Park 31 Monitoring
930 Sir Francis Drake Blvd 20 Monitoring
64 Alder Ave 50 5
APN: 007-041-028 27 Irrigation
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
199

RECOMMENDATIONS
Six soundings were selected for subsurface geophysical data collection. The sounding locations were determined based on site specific geologic conditions and subsurface data from neighboring and onsite well completion reports. A calibration sounding near a productive well with a known depth and yield was available at the time of the survey.

One calibration sounding was conducted near Irrigation Well 1 to improve the accuracy of our data.

The two existing irrigation wells on the property are drilled into an alluvial river deposit above the bedrock formation (Franciscan Mélange). Based on the results below and the fact that the Franciscan Mélange is typically a low yielding formation for water wells, the primary opportunity to develop the necessary groundwater for the project is likely within the alluvial deposit.

Based on the results below it is our recommendation to perform further geological and geophysical exploration of the property with the goal to identify subsurface features demonstrating higher hydraulic conductivity such as paleo-creek channels. Such features if identified would have a greater potential to provide the water needs of the property.

Table 1. A summary of the Groundwater Survey results
Soundings Drilling Depth
(feet) Estimated Yield GPM
1 52 Category B (2-6 gpm)
2 56 Category B (2-6 gpm)
3 56 Category B (2-6 gpm)
4 66 Category B (2-6 gpm)
5 82 Category C (5-10 gpm)
6 77 Category B (2-6 gpm)
*WGS does not recommend drilling in an area with an interpreted yield of less than 5 gallons per minute (Category A & B) due to factors in the drilling process that can at times significantly and detrimentally, affect the final yield of a low yield aquifer. Non-recommended yields have the possibility of being as low as 0.0 gallons per minute.

It should be noted that non- recommended well sites (category A & B) have been successfully drilled on other projects and produced the estimated yields. However, as stated above there is a greater risk of drilling a non-productive well for category A & B locations.

Prior to drilling (if done) it should be ascertained that the drill operator has substantial experience with the drilling equipment and that he or she operates the equipment correctly. In addition, the property owner should be present during the drilling process.

It should be noted that drilling always causes some damage to the aquifer local to the drill site and this should be considered prior to drilling to an aquifer that has an Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
200
interpreted low yield. This report should be used as a guide, along with the driller’s experience with drilling in the area.

If it is decided to drill a well, part of its development should include a long flow test (often 4 to 12 hours in length) in an attempt to remove all of the sediment and air that may have been introduced into the surrounding rock formation (aquifer) by the drilling process, and that may restrict the flow of water into the well and therefore, the subsequent yield. The flow test may need to be longer for less productive water bearing zones. We consider well development part of the water well completion process.

As stated earlier in this report, the interpreted depths in this report should be generally used as a maximum depth to drill. If the interpreted yield is obtained at a shallower depth than that provided by the interpretation, drilling to greater depths is not necessarily recommended.

All of the data, analysis, interpretations and conclusions in this report have been prepared by persons who have had a rigorous training in the acquisition and analysis of Seismoelectric data.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
201

APPENDIX A

The Seismoelectric Survey Method

INTRODUCTION
The Seismoelectric method, sometimes called the Electrokinetic Survey (ESI) or Electroseismic method, is a geophysical technique that attempts to provide the depth to groundwater and an estimate of the permeability, and hence yield, that might be expected from a well drilled into the aquifer. The physics of the method has been understood since the 1930’s when Thompson (1936) and Ivanov (1939 and 1950) were the first to realize that a seismic compression wave (p-wave) impulse will provide sufficient oscillating pressure in rock pore fluids to produce a measurable oscillating electrical potential at the ground surface.

The Seismoelectric method is related to the commonly known phenomenon called streaming potential, where flowing subsurface water produces a voltage measurable on the ground surface. A more distant relative of the method, where rapidly rising air produces electrical charge separations, thus creating large potential differences, are thunderstorms.

Since the papers by Thompson and Ivanov were written, many investigations into the method have been completed and many papers have been published; the more significant of these are listed at the end of this document.

Until recently, the electrical signal from a seismic pulse impinging on subsurface groundwater was difficult to measure since electrical noise, especially powerline noise, contaminated the data. However, Groundflow Ltd., based in the United Kingdom, discovered a new detection method that is now patented both in the United Kingdom and the United States. This method uses electrically isolated lines from each electrode pair, referencing their potentials to a floating virtual earth, and positioning the electrode pairs close to the seismic source, thereby achieving a significant improvement in the signal to noise ratio.

A significant amount of research is now being done into this method with organizations such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the Exxon Production and Research Company. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization has also become involved.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
202

BASIC THEORY OF THE METHOD
Seismoelectric effects are initiated by seismic waves, usually p-waves, passing through a porous rock and inducing relative motion between the rock matrix and the fluid within the rock pores. Motion of ionic fluid through capillaries in the rock occurs with cations preferentially adhering to the capillary walls, so that the applied pressure and resulting fluid flow relative to the rock matrix separates the cations and anions thus producing an electric dipole. This is called the Seismoelectric effect.

This is illustrated in Figure 1. A seismic source produces a seismic compression wave, which then propagates into the ground at a speed depending on the rocks through which it passes. Generally this speed varies from about 5000 ft/sec to over 10,000 ft/sec in sedimentary rocks, but can be faster in igneous and metamorphic rocks. The wave spreads out to form a hemisphere as illustrated in Figure 1. When the initial pressure pulse reaches the water table, or a rock saturated with water, electrical charges are separated as described above, and the electrical signal is transmitted back to the ground surface at approximately the speed of light. Conversely, when the wavefront emerges from the saturated zone (aquifer) at depth into a layer with little water, the signal decays to zero. The signal also usually decays to zero if the water in the aquifer becomes saline. Generally, the amplitude of the signal will also decay slowly with depth, as the spreading seismic wave loses its high frequency components and its amplitude decreases due to spherical divergence along with other factors. The fundamental relationships between the spreading seismic wave, the resulting electrical dipoles (charge separations) and the voltage at the ground surface are complex.

Figure 1. Schematic drawing illustrating the basic principles of the Electroseismic method at the top of an aquifer. This diagram should be rotated about its axis (seismic source) by 180° to image the hemispherical nature of the seismic wave.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
203
The circular area (in plan view) encompassed by the leading edge of the pulse when the negative part the pulse just intersects the interface is called the first Fresnel Zone. As can be seen in Figure 2, the curvature of the wavefront and the Fresnel geometry ensures that the signal is focused back to the shot point.

Figure 2. Schematic showing the focusing of the electrical signals back to the shot point.

MEASURING THE SEISMOELECTRIC EFFECT
The geometry of the seismic source and electrode array used to measure the Seismoelectric effect are illustrated in Figure 3. The electrodes in the array are spaced symmetrically about the seismic source at distances from the source of about 2.5 and 8 feet. The seismic wave is created and the instrument measures the resulting electrical signal.

Figure 3. The geometry of the seismic source and electrodes used to measure the Seismoelectric effect.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
204
One of the instruments used to measure the Seismoelectric effect is called the AquaLocate GF6. This instrument incorporates the floating electrode system described earlier in this text.

INTERPRETATION
Water can move within the pores of the rock easier in good aquifers (high permeability and porosity) than in poor ones and this provides the basis for assessing aquifer quality.

If the water moves easily then it will move rapidly when under the influence of the seismic pulse. If the rock has a low permeability or hydraulic conductivity, then the water will move slowly. This causes the shape of the Seismoelectric signal to be different in these two cases. A good aquifer will produce a more rapid rise in the signal amplitude than a poor one, all else being equal. A steeper rise time implies that the signal contains higher frequencies than a slow rising signal and the signal is said to have a greater bandwidth. Water yield estimates can be obtained from the signal bandwidth and the calculations to do this are programmed into the GF2500 instrument. The depth to the top of the aquifer is found from the time taken for the seismic signal to travel to the aquifer, which can be found from the time to the first arrival of the Seismoelectric signal. Likewise, the depth to the bottom of the aquifer can be estimated from the time when the ESI signal decays to zero. In other words, the aquifer thickness can be found from the length of the Seismoelectric signal. The velocity of seismic waves in different rock types is generally well known from seismic surveys, although there can be significant variations in the velocity of rocks, depending on several factors.

LIMITATIONS OF THE METHOD
The main limitations of the Seismoelectric method relate to the depth of investigation and the depth resolution, the chemistry of the water, the geology of the aquifer and to the geometry of the signal generation array.

The depth of investigation depends on the strength of the seismic source and on the nature of the soil and subsoil. A soft soil and subsoil will attenuate the seismic signal and limit penetration depth. A hammer source can usually provide investigation depths to 250 or 300 feet. A buffalo source can investigate to depths of over 1500 feet.

Resolving the thickness of an aquifer depends on the length of the seismic pulse, which depends on the speed of seismic waves in the rocks. The higher the speed of the seismic pulse the longer is its wavelength and consequently, the lower is its resolution. In low speed rocks resolution may be 5 to 15 feet whereas in rocks with high velocities the resolution may be 15 to 45 feet, or even less.

Predicting the depth to an aquifer depends on knowing the seismic velocity of the rocks under the sounding site. Since the velocity of even well-defined rocks, for example sandstone, can vary widely from site to site, unless these velocities are measured, then Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
205
an estimate has to be used. If a local well is available where a sounding can be conducted, then this will provide a “calibration”, and should make the interpreted depth more reliable.

If an aquifer contains saline water then the Seismoelectric signal is essentially “short circuited” and no signal is observed, hence Seismoelectric signals are only observed from freshwater aquifers.

The focusing effect of layered aquifers discussed earlier is advantageous when using the electrode array centered about the seismic source and works well for most layered, usually sedimentary, rocks. However, the method is not as effective in areas where the aquifer lies in cavities and large fractures although it can detect aquifers in fractured brittle rocks if they form layers. Limestone Karst terrain is an example of where the method is not usually successful.

AQUIFERS
An aquifer is a water saturated permeable geologic layer, or fracture zone, that is able to transmit significant quantities of water. A geologic layer that cannot transmit significant quantities of water is usually referred to as an aquiclude. An aquitard is a rock unit that generally has a low permeability and hence will transmit only very limited quantities of water and are generally not suitable for production wells. The terms Aquifer or aquitards can be used to define most geologic strata. The most common aquifers include permeable sedimentary rocks such as sandstones, limestones, sand and gravel layers, and highly fractured volcanic and crystalline rocks. Common aquitards are unfractured shales, clays and dense (unfractured) crystalline rocks.

Sedimentary aquifers form layers and usually have a large lateral extent, whereas aquifers in fracture zones in igneous and crystalline rocks may have a very limited lateral extent. When searching for water using any geophysical method, including the Seismoelectric method, the type of aquifer that may be present should be considered, both when planning a survey and especially when considering drilling.

The Seismoelectric method responds to a subsurface circular area whose radius depends on the dimensions of the first Fresnel zone and for practical purposes is approximately equal to one third of the depth to the aquifer. If the survey is conducted in an area where the aquifers reside in fracture zones, it is possible that the Seismoelectric signals will predict the occurrence of an aquifer, which occurs within a fractured area whose lateral extent is limited, but the drill hole may not intersect the fracture zone that provides the Seismoelectric signal. Since the radius of the circle of influence for the Seismoelectric method increases with the depth of the investigation, the difficulty of intersecting the fracture zone with a drill becomes greater as the depth to the aquifer increases.

Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
206

REFERENCES
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) publications on this subject are listed on http://eaps.mit.edu/erl/research/papers.html. Of particular importance are papers by Stephen Pride, borehole experiments by Oleg Mikhailov and computer modeling by Matthew Haartsen.

The following lists some of the more significant references.

Beamish, D., Characteristics of near-surface Electroseismic coupling. 1999, Geophys. J.

Int., 137, 231-242
Biot, M. A., 1956, Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid saturated porous solid, I and II: J. Acoust. Soc. AM., 28, 168-191
Biot, M. A., 1962a, Mechanics of deformation and acoustic propagation in porous media: J. Appl. Phys., 33, 1482-1498
Biot, M. A., 1962b, Generalized theory of acoustic propagation in porous dissipative media: J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 34, 1254-1264
Butler, K. E., Russell, R. D., Kepic, A. W., and Maxwell, M., 1994, Mapping of a stratigraphic boundary by its seismoelectric response, SAGEEP Annual Meeting, 1994 Proceedings, 689-699
Clarke, R. H., and Millar, J. W. A., 1995, Fluid Detection Method, patent Application PCT/GB95/00844, Filed 13/4/95, based on UK 94 07649.4, filed 18/4/94.

Frenkel, J., 1944, On the theory of seismic and seismoelectric phenomenon in moist soil.

J. Phys, 8, 230-241
Hankin, S., and Waring, Chris, 1999, ESI Geophysical Survey of Sites Near Kerang, Victoria, Australia. Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization, ANSTO/C601.

Ivanov, A. G., 1939 Effect of electization of earth layers by elastic waves passing through them (in Russian): Doklady Akademii Nauk. SSSR, 24, 42-45 Ivanov, A. G., 1950 Method for studying seismoelectric effects (In Russian): Izvestiya Akademii Nauk. SSSR ser. Geogr. I geofiz., 14,542-546
Martner, S. T. and Sparks, N. R., 1959, The Electroseismic effect: Geophysics, 24, 297- 308
Item 8 Attachment 2
Item 8 Attachment 2
207
Appxoimate Scale in Feet
0 100’
Memorial Park
San Anselmo, California
N
Site Plan Tamalpais
Environmental
Consultants
Tp
Consultants
Figure
1 Reference: GoogleEarth
Parking Lot Millenium
Playground
Pathway
Playing Fields
Rest
Rooms
Wells MW-1 and IR-2
Well IR-1
Meadows
Picnic Area
Existing Well
MW-2B
(not connected yet)
Alderney
MW-3
Pathway
Potential Stormwater
Collection
Proposed New Recycled
Water Connection For
Trucks (4”)
Potential New Tank Locations
Volume 8,000 to 20,000 gallons
Potential Greywater
Collection
Item 8 Attachment 3
Item 8 Attachment 3
208
Item 8 Attachment 4
Item 8 Attachment 4
209
Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc.

FOR STORMTECH

INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS

VISIT OUR APP
SiteAssist
MC-3500 STORMTECH CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS

1. CHAMBERS SHALL BE STORMTECH MC-3500.

2. CHAMBERS SHALL BE ARCH-SHAPED AND SHALL BE MANUFACTURED FROM VIRGIN, IMPACT-MODIFIED POLYPROPYLENE COPOLYMERS.

3. CHAMBERS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418, "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS" CHAMBER CLASSIFICATION 45x76 DESIGNATION SS.

4. CHAMBER ROWS SHALL PROVIDE CONTINUOUS, UNOBSTRUCTED INTERNAL SPACE WITH NO INTERNAL SUPPORTS THAT WOULD IMPEDE FLOW OR LIMIT ACCESS FOR INSPECTION.

5. THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THE CHAMBERS, THE STRUCTURAL BACKFILL, AND THE INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS SHALL ENSURE THAT THE LOAD FACTORS SPECIFIED IN THE AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS, SECTION 12.12, ARE MET FOR: 1) LONG-DURATION DEAD LOADS AND 2) SHORT-DURATION LIVE LOADS, BASED ON THE AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK WITH CONSIDERATION FOR IMPACT AND MULTIPLE VEHICLE PRESENCES.

6. CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED, TESTED AND ALLOWABLE LOAD CONFIGURATIONS DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787, "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS".

LOAD CONFIGURATIONS SHALL INCLUDE: 1) INSTANTANEOUS (<1 MIN) AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK LIVE LOAD ON MINIMUM COVER 2) MAXIMUM PERMANENT (75-YR) COVER LOAD AND 3) ALLOWABLE COVER WITH PARKED (1-WEEK) AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK.

7. REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING AND INSTALLATION: · TO MAINTAIN THE WIDTH OF CHAMBERS DURING SHIPPING AND HANDLING, CHAMBERS SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL, INTERLOCKING STACKING LUGS. · TO ENSURE A SECURE JOINT DURING INSTALLATION AND BACKFILL, THE HEIGHT OF THE CHAMBER JOINT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 3”. · TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF THE ARCH SHAPE DURING INSTALLATION, a) THE ARCH STIFFNESS CONSTANT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 6.2.8 OF ASTM F2418 SHALL BE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 450 LBS/IN/IN. AND b) TO RESIST CHAMBER DEFORMATION DURING INSTALLATION AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES (ABOVE 73° F / 23° C), CHAMBERS SHALL BE PRODUCED FROM REFLECTIVE GOLD OR YELLOW COLORS.

8. ONLY CHAMBERS THAT ARE APPROVED BY THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER WILL BE ALLOWED. UPON REQUEST BY THE SITE DESIGN

ENGINEER OR OWNER, THE CHAMBER MANUFACTURER SHALL SUBMIT A STRUCTURAL EVALUATION FOR APPROVAL BEFORE DELIVERING CHAMBERS TO THE PROJECT SITE AS FOLLOWS: · THE STRUCTURAL EVALUATION SHALL BE SEALED BY A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. · THE STRUCTURAL EVALUATION SHALL DEMONSTRATE THAT THE SAFETY FACTORS ARE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 1.95 FOR DEAD LOAD AND 1.75 FOR LIVE LOAD, THE MINIMUM REQUIRED BY ASTM F2787 AND BY SECTIONS 3 AND 12.12 OF THE AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS FOR THERMOPLASTIC PIPE. · THE TEST DERIVED CREEP MODULUS AS SPECIFIED IN ASTM F2418 SHALL BE USED FOR PERMANENT DEAD LOAD DESIGN EXCEPT THAT IT SHALL BE THE 75-YEAR MODULUS USED FOR DESIGN.

9. CHAMBERS AND END CAPS SHALL BE PRODUCED AT AN ISO 9001 CERTIFIED MANUFACTURING FACILITY.

IMPORTANT - NOTES FOR THE BIDDING AND INSTALLATION OF MC-3500 CHAMBER SYSTEM

1. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED UNTIL THE MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE HAS COMPLETED A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH THE INSTALLERS.

2. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE".

3. CHAMBERS ARE NOT TO BE BACKFILLED WITH A DOZER OR AN EXCAVATOR SITUATED OVER THE CHAMBERS.

STORMTECH RECOMMENDS 3 BACKFILL METHODS: · STONESHOOTER LOCATED OFF THE CHAMBER BED. · BACKFILL AS ROWS ARE BUILT USING AN EXCAVATOR ON THE FOUNDATION STONE OR SUBGRADE. · BACKFILL FROM OUTSIDE THE EXCAVATION USING A LONG BOOM HOE OR EXCAVATOR.

4. THE FOUNDATION STONE SHALL BE LEVELED AND COMPACTED PRIOR TO PLACING CHAMBERS.

5. JOINTS BETWEEN CHAMBERS SHALL BE PROPERLY SEATED PRIOR TO PLACING STONE.

6. MAINTAIN MINIMUM - 6" (150 mm) SPACING BETWEEN THE CHAMBER ROWS.

7. INLET AND OUTLET MANIFOLDS MUST BE INSERTED A MINIMUM OF 12" (300 mm) INTO CHAMBER END CAPS.

8. EMBEDMENT STONE SURROUNDING CHAMBERS MUST BE A CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE MEETING THE AASHTO M43 DESIGNATION OF #3 OR #4.

9. STONE MUST BE PLACED ON THE TOP CENTER OF THE CHAMBER TO ANCHOR THE CHAMBERS IN PLACE AND PRESERVE ROW SPACING.

10. THE CONTRACTOR MUST REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES WITH CHAMBER FOUNDATION MATERIALS BEARING CAPACITIES TO THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER.

11. ADS RECOMMENDS THE USE OF "FLEXSTORM CATCH IT" INSERTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR ALL INLETS TO PROTECT THE SUBSURFACE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FROM CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF.

NOTES FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT

1. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE".

2. THE USE OF EQUIPMENT OVER MC-3500 CHAMBERS IS LIMITED: · NO EQUIPMENT IS ALLOWED ON BARE CHAMBERS. · NO RUBBER TIRED LOADER, DUMP TRUCK, OR EXCAVATORS ARE ALLOWED UNTIL PROPER FILL DEPTHS ARE REACHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE". · WEIGHT LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CAN BE FOUND IN THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE".

3. FULL 36" (900 mm) OF STABILIZED COVER MATERIALS OVER THE CHAMBERS IS REQUIRED FOR DUMP TRUCK TRAVEL OR DUMPING.

USE OF A DOZER TO PUSH EMBEDMENT STONE BETWEEN THE ROWS OF CHAMBERS MAY CAUSE DAMAGE TO CHAMBERS AND IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE BACKFILL METHOD. ANY CHAMBERS DAMAGED BY USING THE "DUMP AND PUSH" METHOD ARE NOT COVERED UNDER THE STORMTECH STANDARD WARRANTY.

PROJECT INFORMATION

ADS SALES REP
PROJECT NO.

ENGINEERED PRODUCT

MANAGER

RAINWATER HARVESTING

SAN ANSELMO, CA
Item 8 Attachment 5
Item 8 Attachment 5
210
StormTech 888-892-2694 | WWW.STORMTECH.COM ® Chamber System 4640 TRUEMAN BLVD HILLIARD, OH 43026 1-800-733-7473 DATE: DRAWN: GK PROJECT #: CHECKED: N/A THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED TO ADS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OTHER PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER SHALL REVIEW THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IT IS THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE PRODUCT(S) DEPICTED AND ALL ASSOCIATED DETAILS MEET ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. DATE DRW CHK DESCRIPTION RAINWATER HARVESTING SAN ANSELMO, CA SHEET
2 5 OF
NOTES
• MANIFOLD SIZE TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER. SEE TECH NOTE #6.32 FOR MANIFOLD SIZING GUIDANCE. • DUE TO THE ADAPTATION OF THIS CHAMBER SYSTEM TO SPECIFIC SITE AND DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO CUT AND COUPLE ADDITIONAL PIPE TO STANDARD MANIFOLD COMPONENTS IN THE FIELD.
• THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER MUST REVIEW ELEVATIONS AND IF NECESSARY ADJUST GRADING TO ENSURE THE CHAMBER COVER REQUIREMENTS ARE MET. • THIS CHAMBER SYSTEM WAS DESIGNED WITHOUT SITE-SPECIFIC INFORMATION ON SOIL CONDITIONS OR BEARING CAPACITY. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR

DETERMINING
THE SUITABILITY OF THE SOIL AND PROVIDING THE BEARING CAPACITY OF THE INSITU SOILS. THE BASE STONE DEPTH MAY BE INCREASED OR DECREASED ONCE THIS INFORMATION IS PROVIDED. • NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION: THIS LAYOUT IS FOR DIMENSIONAL PURPOSES ONLY TO PROVE CONCEPT & THE REQUIRED STORAGE VOLUME CAN BE ACHIEVED ON SITE.

CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (TOP OF PAVEMENT/UNPAVED): 12.50 MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (UNPAVED WITH TRAFFIC): 6.50
MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (UNPAVED NO TRAFFIC): 6.00
MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (TOP OF RIGID CONCRETE PAVEMENT): 6.00 MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (BASE OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT): 6.00 TOP OF STONE: 5.50
TOP OF MC-3500 CHAMBER: 4.50
24" ISOLATOR ROW PLUS INVERT: 0.92
18" x 18" BOTTOM MANIFOLD INVERT: 0.90
BOTTOM OF MC-3500 CHAMBER: 0.75
BOTTOM OF STONE: 0.00

PROPOSED LAYOUT
72 STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS
16 STORMTECH MC-3500 END CAPS
12 STONE ABOVE (in)
9 STONE BELOW (in)
40 STONE VOID
14194

INSTALLED SYSTEM VOLUME (CF)
(PERIMETER STONE INCLUDED)
(COVER STONE INCLUDED)
(BASE STONE INCLUDED)
4227 SYSTEM AREA (SF)
262.4 SYSTEM PERIMETER (ft)
*INVERT ABOVE BASE OF CHAMBER
DESCRIPTION INVERT* MAX FLOW

ITEM ON

LAYOUT PART TYPE

2.06" 24" BOTTOM CORED END CAP, PART#: MC3500IEPP24BC / TYP OF ALL 24" BOTTOM

CONNECTIONS AND ISOLATOR PLUS ROWS

PREFABRICATED END CAP A

1.77" 18" BOTTOM CORED END CAP, PART#: MC3500IEPP18BC / TYP OF ALL 18" BOTTOM

CONNECTIONS

PREFABRICATED END CAP B
FLAMP C INSTALL FLAMP ON 24" ACCESS PIPE / PART#: MC350024RAMP MANIFOLD D 18" x 18" BOTTOM MANIFOLD, ADS N-12 1.77"
E (DESIGN BY ENGINEER / PROVIDED BY OTHERS) 20.9 CFS IN

CONCRETE STRUCTURE
W/WEIR
INSPECTION PORT F 4" SEE DETAIL

ISOLATOR ROW PLUS
(SEE DETAIL)
PLACE MINIMUM 17.50' OF ADSPLUS175 WOVEN GEOTEXTILE OVER BEDDING

STONE AND UNDERNEATH CHAMBER FEET FOR SCOUR PROTECTION AT ALL

CHAMBER INLET ROWS
BED LIMITS 20' 10' 0

74.38' 56.83'

68.25'
D 54.83'
C
B
A
F
E
Item 8 Attachment 5
Item 8 Attachment 5
211
StormTech 888-892-2694 | WWW.STORMTECH.COM ® Chamber System ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS: STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBER SYSTEMS PLEASE NOTE:

1. THE LISTED AASHTO DESIGNATIONS ARE FOR GRADATIONS ONLY. THE STONE MUST ALSO BE CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR. FOR EXAMPLE, A SPECIFICATION FOR #4 STONE WOULD STATE: "CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR NO. 4 (AASHTO M43) STONE".

2. STORMTECH COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS ARE MET FOR 'A' LOCATION MATERIALS WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED IN 9" (230 mm) (MAX) LIFTS USING TWO FULL COVERAGES WITH A VIBRATORY COMPACTOR.

3. WHERE INFILTRATION SURFACES MAY BE COMPROMISED BY COMPACTION, FOR STANDARD DESIGN LOAD CONDITIONS, A FLAT SURFACE MAY BE ACHIEVED BY RAKING OR DRAGGING WITHOUT COMPACTION EQUIPMENT. FOR SPECIAL LOAD DESIGNS, CONTACT STORMTECH FOR COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS.

4. ONCE LAYER 'C' IS PLACED, ANY SOIL/MATERIAL CAN BE PLACED IN LAYER 'D' UP TO THE FINISHED GRADE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE SOILS CAN BE USED TO REPLACE THE MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS OF LAYER 'C' OR 'D' AT THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S DISCRETION.

NOTES:

1. CHAMBERS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418, "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS" CHAMBER CLASSIFICATION 45x76 DESIGNATION SS.

2. MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS".

3. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE BEARING RESISTANCE (ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY) OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS AND THE DEPTH OF FOUNDATION STONE WITH CONSIDERATION FOR THE RANGE OF EXPECTED SOIL MOISTURE CONDITIONS.

4. PERIMETER STONE MUST BE EXTENDED HORIZONTALLY TO THE EXCAVATION WALL FOR BOTH VERTICAL AND SLOPED EXCAVATION WALLS.

5. REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING AND INSTALLATION: · TO MAINTAIN THE WIDTH OF CHAMBERS DURING SHIPPING AND HANDLING, CHAMBERS SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL, INTERLOCKING STACKING LUGS. · TO ENSURE A SECURE JOINT DURING INSTALLATION AND BACKFILL, THE HEIGHT OF THE CHAMBER JOINT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 3”. · TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF THE ARCH SHAPE DURING INSTALLATION, a) THE ARCH STIFFNESS CONSTANT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 6.2.8 OF ASTM F2418 SHALL BE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 450 LBS/IN/IN.

AND b) TO RESIST CHAMBER DEFORMATION DURING INSTALLATION AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES (ABOVE 73° F / 23° C), CHAMBERS SHALL BE PRODUCED FROM REFLECTIVE GOLD OR YELLOW COLORS.

MATERIAL LOCATION DESCRIPTION

AASHTO MATERIAL

CLASSIFICATIONS COMPACTION / DENSITY REQUIREMENT
D
FINAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'D' STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE 'C'

LAYER TO THE BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT OR UNPAVED FINISHED GRADE ABOVE. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASE MAY BE PART OF THE 'D' LAYER
ANY SOIL/ROCK MATERIALS, NATIVE SOILS, OR PER ENGINEER'S PLANS.

CHECK PLANS FOR PAVEMENT SUBGRADE REQUIREMENTS. N/A
PREPARE PER SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S PLANS. PAVED

INSTALLATIONS MAY HAVE STRINGENT MATERIAL AND
PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS.

C
INITIAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'C' STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE EMBEDMENT STONE ('B' LAYER) TO 24" (600 mm) ABOVE THE TOP OF THE CHAMBER. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASE MAY BE A PART OF THE 'C' LAYER.

GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, <35% FINES OR PROCESSED AGGREGATE.

MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE MATERIALS CAN BE USED IN LIEU OF THIS LAYER.

AASHTO M145¹ A-1, A-2-4, A-3
OR
AASHTO M43¹ 3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57, 6, 67, 68, 7, 78, 8, 89, 9, 10 BEGIN COMPACTIONS AFTER 24" (600 mm) OF MATERIAL OVER
THE CHAMBERS IS REACHED. COMPACT ADDITIONAL LAYERS IN
12" (300 mm) MAX LIFTS TO A MIN. 95% PROCTOR DENSITY FOR WELL GRADED MATERIAL AND 95% RELATIVE DENSITY FOR
PROCESSED AGGREGATE MATERIALS.

B
EMBEDMENT STONE: FILL SURROUNDING THE CHAMBERS FROM THE FOUNDATION STONE ('A' LAYER) TO THE 'C' LAYER ABOVE. CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE AASHTO M43¹ 3, 4
A
FOUNDATION STONE: FILL BELOW CHAMBERS FROM THE SUBGRADE UP TO THE FOOT (BOTTOM) OF THE CHAMBER. CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE AASHTO M43¹ 3, 4 PLATE COMPACT OR ROLL TO ACHIEVE A FLAT SURFACE.2,3 45"
(1140 mm)
18"
(450 mm) MIN*
8'
(2.4 m)
MAX
77" (1950 mm) 12" (300 mm) MIN
12" (300 mm) MIN
6"
(150 mm) MIN

DEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED
BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER 9" (230 mm) MIN
D
C
B
A
*TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVED

INSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR,
INCREASE COVER TO 24" (600 mm).
6" (150 mm) MIN

PERIMETER STONE
(SEE NOTE 4)

EXCAVATION WALL
(CAN BE SLOPED OR VERTICAL)
MC-3500

END CAP SUBGRADE SOILS
(SEE NOTE 3)

PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNED

BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER)
NO COMPACTION REQUIRED.

ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE ALL
AROUND CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE IN A & B LAYERS 4640 TRUEMAN BLVD HILLIARD, OH 43026 1-800-733-7473 DATE: DRAWN: GK PROJECT #: CHECKED: N/A THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED TO ADS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OTHER PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER SHALL REVIEW THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IT IS THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE PRODUCT(S) DEPICTED AND ALL ASSOCIATED DETAILS MEET ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. DATE DRW CHK DESCRIPTION RAINWATER HARVESTING SAN ANSELMO, CA SHEET
3 5 OF
Item 8 Attachment 5
Item 8 Attachment 5
212
StormTech 888-892-2694 | WWW.STORMTECH.COM ® Chamber System

INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE
STEP 1) INSPECT ISOLATOR ROW PLUS FOR SEDIMENT
A. INSPECTION PORTS (IF PRESENT)
A.1. REMOVE/OPEN LID ON NYLOPLAST INLINE DRAIN
A.2. REMOVE AND CLEAN FLEXSTORM FILTER IF INSTALLED
A.3. USING A FLASHLIGHT AND STADIA ROD, MEASURE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT AND RECORD ON MAINTENANCE LOG A.4. LOWER A CAMERA INTO ISOLATOR ROW PLUS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION OF SEDIMENT LEVELS (OPTIONAL) A.5. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.

B. ALL ISOLATOR PLUS ROWS
B.1. REMOVE COVER FROM STRUCTURE AT UPSTREAM END OF ISOLATOR ROW PLUS B.2. USING A FLASHLIGHT, INSPECT DOWN THE ISOLATOR ROW PLUS THROUGH OUTLET PIPE i) MIRRORS ON POLES OR CAMERAS MAY BE USED TO AVOID A CONFINED SPACE ENTRY ii) FOLLOW OSHA REGULATIONS FOR CONFINED SPACE ENTRY IF ENTERING MANHOLE B.3. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.

STEP 2) CLEAN OUT ISOLATOR ROW PLUS USING THE JETVAC PROCESS A. A FIXED CULVERT CLEANING NOZZLE WITH REAR FACING SPREAD OF 45" (1.1 m) OR MORE IS PREFERRED B. APPLY MULTIPLE PASSES OF JETVAC UNTIL BACKFLUSH WATER IS CLEAN C. VACUUM STRUCTURE SUMP AS REQUIRED
STEP 3) REPLACE ALL COVERS, GRATES, FILTERS, AND LIDS; RECORD OBSERVATIONS AND ACTIONS.

STEP 4) INSPECT AND CLEAN BASINS AND MANHOLES UPSTREAM OF THE STORMTECH SYSTEM.

NOTES

1. INSPECT EVERY 6 MONTHS DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION. ADJUST THE INSPECTION INTERVAL BASED ON PREVIOUS OBSERVATIONS OF SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION AND HIGH WATER ELEVATIONS.

2. CONDUCT JETTING AND VACTORING ANNUALLY OR WHEN INSPECTION SHOWS THAT MAINTENANCE IS NECESSARY.

CATCH BASIN
OR

MANHOLE
MC-3500 ISOLATOR ROW PLUS DETAIL
NTS
24" (600 mm) HDPE ACCESS PIPE REQUIRED USE

FACTORY PRE-CORED END CAP
PART #: MC3500IEPP24BC OR MC3500IEPP24BW

STORMTECH HIGHLY RECOMMENDS

FLEXSTORM INSERTS IN ANY UPSTREAM

STRUCTURES WITH OPEN GRATES

COVER PIPE CONNECTION TO END CAP WITH ADS
GEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE MC-3500 CHAMBER

OPTIONAL INSPECTION PORT
MC-3500 END CAP
ONE LAYER OF ADSPLUS175 WOVEN GEOTEXTILE BETWEEN

FOUNDATION STONE AND CHAMBERS

8.25' (2.51 m) MIN WIDE CONTINUOUS FABRIC WITHOUT SEAMS

SUMP DEPTH TBD BY

SITE DESIGN ENGINEER
(24" [600 mm] MIN RECOMMENDED)
INSTALL FLAMP ON 24" (600 mm) ACCESS PIPE
PART #: MC350024RAMP
NOTE:

INSPECTION PORTS MAY BE CONNECTED THROUGH ANY CHAMBER CORRUGATION VALLEY.

STORMTECH CHAMBER
8" NYLOPLAST INSPECTION PORT
BODY (PART# 2708AG4IPKIT) OR

TRAFFIC RATED BOX W/SOLID

LOCKING COVER

CONCRETE COLLAR

PAVEMENT
12" (300 mm) MIN WIDTH

CONCRETE SLAB
6" (150 mm) MIN THICKNESS
4" PVC INSPECTION PORT DETAIL
(MC SERIES CHAMBER)
NTS

CONCRETE COLLAR NOT REQUIRED

FOR UNPAVED APPLICATIONS
4" (100 mm)
SDR 35 PIPE
4" (100 mm) INSERTA TEE

TO BE CENTERED ON
CORRUGATION VALLEY 4640 TRUEMAN BLVD HILLIARD, OH 43026 1-800-733-7473 DATE: DRAWN: GK PROJECT #: CHECKED: N/A THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED TO ADS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OTHER PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER SHALL REVIEW THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IT IS THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE PRODUCT(S) DEPICTED AND ALL ASSOCIATED DETAILS MEET ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. DATE DRW CHK DESCRIPTION RAINWATER HARVESTING SAN ANSELMO, CA SHEET
4 5 OF
Item 8 Attachment 5
Item 8 Attachment 5
213
StormTech 888-892-2694 | WWW.STORMTECH.COM ® Chamber System

MC-SERIES END CAP INSERTION DETAIL
NTS
NOTE: MANIFOLD STUB MUST BE LAID HORIZONTAL
FOR A PROPER FIT IN END CAP OPENING.

MANIFOLD HEADER

MANIFOLD STUB

STORMTECH END CAP

MANIFOLD HEADER

MANIFOLD STUB
12" (300 mm)

MIN SEPARATION
12" (300 mm) MIN INSERTION
12" (300 mm)

MIN SEPARATION
12" (300 mm)

MIN INSERTION
PART # STUB B C
MC3500IEPP06T
6" (150 mm) 33.21" (844 mm) --- MC3500IEPP06B --- 0.66" (17 mm) MC3500IEPP08T
8" (200 mm) 31.16" (791 mm) --- MC3500IEPP08B --- 0.81" (21 mm) MC3500IEPP10T
10" (250 mm) 29.04" (738 mm) --- MC3500IEPP10B --- 0.93" (24 mm) MC3500IEPP12T
12" (300 mm) 26.36" (670 mm) --- MC3500IEPP12B --- 1.35" (34 mm) MC3500IEPP15T
15" (375 mm) 23.39" (594 mm) --- MC3500IEPP15B --- 1.50" (38 mm) MC3500IEPP18TC
18" (450 mm)

20.03" (509 mm) --- MC3500IEPP18TW
MC3500IEPP18BC
--- 1.77" (45 mm) MC3500IEPP18BW
MC3500IEPP24TC
24" (600 mm)

14.48" (368 mm) --- MC3500IEPP24TW
MC3500IEPP24BC
--- 2.06" (52 mm) MC3500IEPP24BW
MC3500IEPP30BC 30" (750 mm) --- 2.75" (70 mm)

NOMINAL CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS
SIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 77.0" X 45.0" X 86.0" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 2184 mm) CHAMBER STORAGE 109.9 CUBIC FEET (3.11 m³)
MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 175.0 CUBIC FEET (4.96 m³)
WEIGHT 134 lbs. (60.8 kg)

NOMINAL END CAP SPECIFICATIONS
SIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 75.0" X 45.0" X 22.2" (1905 mm X 1143 mm X 564 mm) END CAP STORAGE 14.9 CUBIC FEET (0.42 m³)
MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 45.1 CUBIC FEET (1.28 m³)
WEIGHT 49 lbs. (22.2 kg)
*ASSUMES 12" (305 mm) STONE ABOVE, 9" (229 mm) STONE FOUNDATION, 6" SPACING BETWEEN CHAMBERS, 6" (152 mm) STONE PERIMETER IN FRONT OF END CAPS AND 40% STONE POROSITY MC-3500 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
NTS

90.0" (2286 mm)

ACTUAL LENGTH

86.0" (2184 mm)

INSTALLED

BUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTION
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINAL

LOWER JOINT

CORRUGATION
WEB
CREST
CREST

STIFFENING RIB
VALLEY

STIFFENING RIB
B
C

75.0"
(1905 mm)

45.0"
(1143 mm)

25.7"
(653 mm)
FOOT

77.0"
(1956 mm)

45.0"
(1143 mm)
STUBS AT BOTTOM OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "B" STUBS AT TOP OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "T" END CAPS WITH A WELDED CROWN PLATE END WITH "C"
END CAPS WITH A PREFABRICATED WELDED STUB END WITH "W"

UPPER JOINT CORRUGATION

22.2"
(564 mm)

INSTALLED

CUSTOM PRECORED INVERTS ARE
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.

INVENTORIED MANIFOLDS INCLUDE
12-24" (300-600 mm) SIZE ON SIZE
AND 15-48" (375-1200 mm)
ECCENTRIC MANIFOLDS. CUSTOM
INVERT LOCATIONS ON THE MC-3500

END CAP CUT IN THE FIELD ARE NOT

RECOMMENDED FOR PIPE SIZES
GREATER THAN 10" (250 mm). THE

INVERT LOCATION IN COLUMN 'B'

ARE THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE FOR
THE PIPE SIZE.

PART # STUB B C
MC3500IEPP06T
6" (150 mm) 33.21" (844 mm) --- MC3500IEPP06B --- 0.66" (17 mm) MC3500IEPP08T
8" (200 mm) 31.16" (791 mm) --- MC3500IEPP08B --- 0.81" (21 mm) MC3500IEPP10T
10" (250 mm) 29.04" (738 mm) --- MC3500IEPP10B --- 0.93" (24 mm) MC3500IEPP12T
12" (300 mm) 26.36" (670 mm) --- MC3500IEPP12B --- 1.35" (34 mm) MC3500IEPP15T
15" (375 mm) 23.39" (594 mm) --- MC3500IEPP15B --- 1.50" (38 mm) MC3500IEPP18TC
18" (450 mm)

20.03" (509 mm) --- MC3500IEPP18TW
MC3500IEPP18BC
--- 1.77" (45 mm) MC3500IEPP18BW
MC3500IEPP24TC
24" (600 mm)

14.48" (368 mm) --- MC3500IEPP24TW
MC3500IEPP24BC
--- 2.06" (52 mm) MC3500IEPP24BW
MC3500IEPP30BC 30" (750 mm) --- 2.75" (70 mm)

90.0" (2286 mm)

ACTUAL LENGTH

86.0" (2184 mm)

INSTALLED

BUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTION
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINAL

LOWER JOINT

CORRUGATION
WEB
CREST
CREST

STIFFENING RIB
VALLEY

STIFFENING RIB
B
C

75.0"
(1905 mm)

45.0"
(1143 mm)

25.7"
(653 mm)
FOOT

77.0"
(1956 mm)

UPPER JOINT CORRUGATION

22.2"
(564 mm)

INSTALLED

CUSTOM PRECORED INVERTS ARE
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.

INVENTORIED MANIFOLDS INCLUDE
12-24" (300-600 mm) SIZE ON SIZE
AND 15-48" (375-1200 mm)
ECCENTRIC MANIFOLDS. CUSTOM
INVERT LOCATIONS ON THE MC-3500

END CAP CUT IN THE FIELD ARE NOT

RECOMMENDED FOR PIPE SIZES
GREATER THAN 10" (250 mm). THE

INVERT LOCATION IN COLUMN 'B'

ARE THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE FOR
THE PIPE SIZE. 4640 TRUEMAN BLVD HILLIARD, OH 43026 1-800-733-7473 DATE: DRAWN: GK PROJECT #: CHECKED: N/A THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED TO ADS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OTHER PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER SHALL REVIEW THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IT IS THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE PRODUCT(S) DEPICTED AND ALL ASSOCIATED DETAILS MEET ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. DATE DRW CHK DESCRIPTION RAINWATER HARVESTING SAN ANSELMO, CA SHEET
5 5 OF
Item 8 Attachment 5
Item 8 Attachment 5
214
Item 8 Attachment 5
Item 8 Attachment 5
215
216
217
218
Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 9.

FROM:

Jeff Zuba, Finance & Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:

Introduction and first reading of an Ordinance to repeal and replace San Anselmo Municipal Code Chapter 2-5 “Purchasing”, the Town’s purchasing policy, and amend Chapter 2 “Town Manager” for consistency with purchasing policy.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the Town Council hold a public hearing to consider adoption of an Ordinance Amendment to repeal and replace San Anselmo Municipal Code Chapter 2-5 “Purchasing”, the Town’s purchasing policy, and amend Chapter 2 “Town Manager” for consistency with purchasing policy.

2. Motion to read the Ordinance Amendment by title only. The Town Clerk will read the full title of the Ordinance.

3. Motion to approve the first reading of the Ordinance Amendment and waive future readings in their entirety.

BACKGROUND
Local jurisdictions are required to adopt policies and procedures governing the purchase of supplies and equipment consistent with State law. (Gov. Code, § 54202 et seq.) San Anselmo adopted its purchasing policy ordinance in 1979, SAMC Chapter 2-5. Given the age of the Town’s purchasing policy, staff suggests amendments to include current best practices. Suggested amendments include:
· Increase Town Manager purchasing threshold amount to $50,000. · Include “green purchasing” policy provisions.
· Include preference for local vendors.

DISCUSSION
A. General Purchasing Policy Overview
The proposed Purchasing Policy Ordinance Amendment repeals and replaces the Town’s current outdated Code, adopted in 1979. The Amendment contains various general updates consistent with current best practices, in addition to a proposed green purchasing policy and a local vendor preference policy.

The Town Manager is the designated purchasing agent who is responsible for the purchase of supplies, materials, services, and equipment. Purchasing procedures are delineated by dollar amount. For purchases of $1,000 or less, the Town Manager may approve a purchase based on informal oral or written vendor quotes.

The Town Manager may also approve purchases between $1,000+ up to $50,000, awarded pursuant to an Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 4 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™219
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 9.
informal process based on at least 3 bids (where possible), to the lowest responsible bidder. A “lowest responsible bidder” is one who timely submits a complete and responsive bid. Price alone is not determinative, but will be considered one factor along with other relevant factors such as quality of service, reputation, and experience. Purchases exceeding $50,000 must be approved by the Town Council pursuant to a formal competitive bid process.

There are several exemptions where informal quotes, or a bidding process (as applicable) is not required, including: 1) emergency purchases; 2) purchases from a unique sole source; 3) professional or expert services; or 4) cooperative purchasing agreements.

Additionally, if the Town Manager determines that certain supplies/equipment are no longer required or obsolete, the Town Manager has the authority to sell this equipment.

The Ordinance Amendment also contains an inflation factor for the dollar threshold amounts pursuant to the San Francisco Bay Area CPI.

Finally, Chapter 2-2.08 regarding the powers and duties of the Town Manager is updated for consistency.

B. Increase Town Manager Purchasing Threshold Amount
The Town’s current purchasing policy requires that the Town Council approve all purchases of over $5,000.

Adjusted for inflation, all purchases over $17,800 currently require Town Council approval.

In contrast, given the high cost of goods and equipment, most California jurisdictions, including Marin municipalities, have larger dollar threshold amounts. For example, Larkspur and Ross require Council approval for purchases over $50,000; and San Rafael requires council approval for purchases over $75,000.

Noted above, the proposed Ordinance Amendment increases the Town Manager purchasing threshold to $50,000. Staff suggests that a higher threshold amount will allow the Town Manager to efficiently procure the goods, equipment, and services necessary for the Town, consistent with current best practices. Purchases above this threshold will continue to require Town Council approval to the lowest responsible bidder.

C. Green Purchasing Policy
The proposed Ordinance Amendment contains a Green Purchasing policy, Section 2-5-09. The policy contains three basic provisions.

First, the Town must purchase recycled products whenever possible, and Town purchases will favor the selection of recycled content and renewable materials. To ensure consideration, the bid amount of environmentally preferred products will be deemed reduced by 5% for the purposes of evaluating the competitiveness of a bid.

Second, the Town will give preference to the purchasing of electric vehicles, and all purchases must be consistent with applicable Town electric fleet policies. In 2019, the Town Council adopted its Electric Vehicle Strategy and amended the General Plan Circulation element to include the goals of the widespread use of electric vehicles. In addition to increasing the amount of public electric vehicle charging station, the Town set the goal of converting the Town’s fleet of vehicles to electric. This purchasing policy furthers the Town’s Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 4 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™220
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 9.
electric vehicle goals.

Finally, all purchases must be consistent with any current or future environmental policies.

The Town’s Climate Action Commission consistently works to promote environmental responsibility and stewardship. To this end, the Climate Action Commission has worked to draft a detailed proposed policy regarding the Town’s purchase of electric vehicles. However, given the current low Town Manager threshold for purchasing goods and services, staff suggests that it return with the Commission’s detailed proposed electrical vehicle amendment at a future date. The proposed Ordinance Amendment will help ensure that current and future policies - such as a more detailed electric vehicle policy - will apply to the Town.

D. Local Vendor Preference Policy
The proposed Ordinance Amendment contains a local vendor preference policy. Local preference policies are intended to provide a competitive advantage to local businesses when doing business within the Town. Due to the high cost of doing business in Marin, including San Anselmo, local businesses face a competitive disadvantage when compared with businesses who are located outside of the Town. The local vendor preference policy would help local businesses to compete in this environment. Additionally, a local vendor preference policy can stimulate the local economy by retaining Town dollars within the Town. Local businesses are those that are located within the Town for at least 12 months prior and have a Town business license.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact as a result of adopting this ordinance and approving the amended agreement.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The Ordinance Amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the “common sense” exemption, CEQA Guideline section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that it will not have a significant adverse environmental effect; and it is not a “project” within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines section 15378, because it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

CONCLUSION
Staff suggests that the Town Council adopt the first reading of the proposed Purchasing Policy Ordinance Amendment. The proposed Amendment will update the Town’s purchasing practices consistent with best practices, including the increased threshold for Town Manager purchasing authority. The Amendment will also benefit the Town by including a green purchasing policy, which allows for the application of future environmental policies that may be developed, including any future detailed Town electric vehicle purchasing policy. Finally, the Amendment will benefit the Town by encouraging and providing Town dollars to local businesses.

Town of San Anselmo Page 3 of 4 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™221
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 9.

Attachment 1: Draft Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.05 Purchasing Policy Town of San Anselmo Page 4 of 4 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™222
1 ORDINANCE NO. ________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO REPEALING AND REPLACING TITLE 2 “ADMINISTRATION”
CHAPTER 5 “PURCHASING” OF THE SAN ANSELMO MUNICIPAL CODE AND AMENDING CHAPTER 2 “TOWN MANAGER” FOR CONSISTENCY WITH

PURCHASING POLICY
WHEREAS, Government Code sections 54201 et seq. govern purchasing by local governmental bodies and require that every local agency adopt policies and procedures governing the purchase of supplies and equipment; and
WHEREAS, San Anselmo’s current purchasing ordinance, Title 2, Chapter 5 “Purchasing”, was adopted in 1979 and requires updating to incorporate current best practices; and WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to repeal and replace Chapter 2-5 “Purchasing” with an ordinance that reflects current best practices and Town policy, and make minor modifications to section 2-8.08 regarding the powers and duties of the Town Manager for consistency (the “Ordinance Amendment”); and
WHEREAS, given the high cost of goods and equipment, the Town seeks to increase the Town Manager purchasing threshold amount to $50,000, consistent with best practices, to promote efficiency in purchasing for the Town; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to promote and encourage environmentally sustainable practices and finds and determines that a “green” purchasing policy of including, but not limited to, preferring the purchase of recycled goods and electric vehicles, is in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the Town’s Climate Action Plan because it contains a “green purchasing policy” that requires the Town to prefer the purchase of environmentally responsible products and services, including electric vehicles, as set forth in the Ordinance Amendment, and that Town purchases must be consistent with any and all environmental Town policies that the Council may adopt in the future; and WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to support local vendors, and finds and determines that funds generated in the community should, to the extent possible, stay in the local economy in order to promote the economic health of the Town and encourage local participation in the provision of supplies, equipment, and services; and
WHEREAS, due to the high costs associated with doing business in San Anselmo including but not limited to higher labor costs, insurance and rent, local vendors are at a competitive disadvantage to vendors located outside the Town, and a local vendor preference is reasonable and necessary to provide equality between the bids of local vendors and vendors outside of the Town.

ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1 ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
223
2 NOW, THEREFORE,THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: Environmental Review. The Ordinance Amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the “common sense” exemption, CEQA Guideline section 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that it will not have a significant adverse environmental effect; and it is not a “project” within the meaning of the CEQA Guidelines § 15378, as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

SECTION 2: The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as findings herein.

SECTION 3: Title 2 “Administration” Chapter 5 “Purchasing” is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced as follows:
2-5.01 – Purpose and scope.

The purpose of this chapter is to set forth procedures for the purchase of supplies, materials, equipment, and services, which procedures shall be in compliance with all federal and state laws. This chapter is enacted pursuant to Government Code section 54202. This chapter shall not apply to public projects as defined by California Public Contracts Code section 20160 et seq., or federal award contracts.
2-5.02 – Purchasing agent designated and duties established. (a) The Town Manager is designated as the purchasing agent for the Town and shall be responsible for the purchase of supplies, materials, equipment, and services for all departments of the Town. The Town Manager may designate all or a portion of the purchasing duties to any Town staff member.
(b) The duties of the purchasing agent include:
(1) Purchase, or contract for the purchase or lease of, all supplies, materials, equipment, and services required by the Town pursuant to the procedures in this chapter and applicable laws.
(2) Negotiate and recommend execution of contracts for the purchase or lease of supplies, materials, equipment, and services pursuant to the procedures in this chapter and applicable laws.
(3) Procure for the Town all the necessary quality in supplies, materials, equipment, and services pursuant to the procedures in this chapter and applicable laws. (4) Supervise the inspection of all supplies, materials, equipment, and services to ensure conformance with specifications.
(5) Recommend and oversee the sale or disposal of all supplies, materials and equipment that cannot be used by the Town or have become unsuitable for Town use.

ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
224
3 (6) Maintain a bidders’ list, including a local bidders’ list, that identifies businesses and service providers that have an established place of business within the Town and have held a Town business license for at least 12 months. (7) For purchases exempt from bidding, periodically reexamine current vendors' prices as to their competitiveness.
2-5.03 – Purchase procedures.
(a) Consistent with this chapter, the purchasing agent shall procure favorable pricing for the procurement of all supplies, materials, equipment, and services. Bids should be solicited and obtained from local vendors whenever possible. (b) For purposes of this chapter “lowest responsible bidder” shall mean the bidder that timely submits a complete and fully responsive bid that best responds in price, quality, service, fitness, and capacity to the bid requirements. Price alone will not be the determinative factor but will be considered along with other relevant bidder responsibility factors such as the quality of the services to be provided or the supplies or equipment to be delivered as well as bidder reputation, qualifications, experience, and ability to timely perform and meet contract requirements. (c) The purchasing agent may approve purchases of supplies, materials, equipment, and services having an estimated value of $1,000 or less. Informal quotes may be obtained from vendors but are not required.
(d) The purchasing agent may approve purchases of supplies, materials, equipment, and services having an estimated value of more than $1,000 but less than and including $50,000. An informal bidding process shall be used. To the extent possible, at least three bids from different vendors shall be obtained. Bids may be received by informal price checking orally or in writing, and shall be documented and maintained in a file with the final awarded contract. The contract shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the purchasing agent may use the competitive bidding process in this section in his/her/their discretion. (e) For purchases of supplies, materials, equipment, and services having an estimated value of over $50,000, the authorization to award a purchase contract shall be made by Town Council resolution following a sealed competitive bid process as follows:
(1) A notice inviting bids shall be prepared and shall include a general description of the goods or services to be purchased, where bid instructions and specifications may be obtained, the time and place for bid openings, and the security required if any. Notices inviting bids shall be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation at least 10 days prior to the opening of bids. The purchasing agent may also advertise for bids by other means including posting on the public bulletin board at Town Hall or on the Town’s website. The purchasing agent shall also solicit bids from prospective vendors whose name are on the bidders’ list or who have made a written request that their names be added thereto, or from such other vendors who are not on the list, but known by the purchasing agent. (2) Sealed bids shall be submitted to the purchasing agent and shall be identified as bids on the envelope. Bids shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the public notices. A tabulation of all bids received shall be open for public inspection during regular business hours for a period of not less than 30 calendar ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
225
4 days after the bid opening. The contract shall be awarded the lowest responsible bidder.
(3) If two or more bids received from responsible bidders are for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, preference shall be given to a local vendor, or the purchasing officer or Town Council (as applicable) may accept the lowest bid made by negotiation with the tie bidders. (4) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this chapter, all bids may be rejected and readvertised in the Town Council’s or purchasing agent’s discretion, as applicable.
(5) Performance Bonds. The purchasing agent shall have authority to require a performance bond before entering a contract in such amount as the purchasing agent shall find reasonably necessary to protect the best interests of the Town.

If the purchasing agent requires a performance bond, the form and amount of the bond shall be described in the notice inviting bids.
2-5.04 – Exemptions. No bidding shall be required under the following conditions:
(a) Emergency conditions. For emergency conditions that involve a sudden, unexpected occurrence or discovery of a condition or circumstance that poses a clear and imminent danger requiring immediate action.
(b) Sole source. When the supplies, services or equipment are unique because of their quality, durability, availability, or fitness for a particular use and are available from a sole source.
(c) Professional services. For the purchase of professional or expert services, such as architectural, landscape architectural, engineering, environmental, land surveying, legal, financial, auditing, human resources, information technology, or construction management services, which may be made on the basis of demonstrated competence and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required.
(d) Cooperative purchasing agreements. Cooperative purchasing agreements for the procurement of any supplies, equipment, and services with one or more public entities in accordance with an agreement entered into between the participants. Such cooperative purchasing may include, but is not limited to, joint or multiparty contracts between public entities and open-ended state public procurement unit contracts which are made available to the Town.
2-5.05 – Local vendor preference.
(a) Local vendor preference policy. To promote the economic health of the Town and encourage local participation, the policy of the Town shall be to purchase materials, supplies, equipment, and services from vendors whose principal place of business is located within Town limits, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the provisions of this chapter.
(b) Local vendor definition. A local vendor shall mean a vendor who has an established place of business within the Town and has held a Town business license for at least 12 months prior to the bid. Any vendor claiming to be a local vendor shall certify the same ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
226
5 in the bid. The Town Manager has the final discretion to determine if the bidder qualifies as a local vendor.
(c) Preference. The bid amounts of all local vendors who submit bids or quotations otherwise in conformance with this chapter shall be deemed reduced by 5% of said bid amount for purposes of determining whether local vendors' bids are the lowest bid(s) submitted.
(d) Exemptions. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the local vendor preference shall not apply to:
(1) Professional or specialized services;
(2) Emergency purchases;
(3) Public projects under California Public Contracts Code section 20160 et seq., or federal award contracts; or
(4) Purchases with an estimated cost of $1,000 or less. 2-5.06 – Surplus materials, supplies, and equipment. At such times as determined by the purchasing agent, reports shall be prepared showing all supplies and equipment that are no longer used or that have become obsolete or worn out. The purchasing agent shall have the authority to sell, trade, or exchange all supplies and equipment consistent with applicable law. 2-5.07 – Staging prohibited. Purchases shall not be knowingly staged, or bids split or separated into smaller units or segments, solely for the purpose of evading the procedures of this chapter.
2-5.08 – Inflation Factor. Every 12 months, the dollar limits set forth in this chapter shall be modified automatically by the percent change in the San Francisco, California All Urban Consumer Price Index.
2-5-09 – Green purchasing policy. Notwithstanding any provision in this chapter to the contrary, the following policies shall apply.
(a) Recycled products.
(1) Whenever possible, product purchases shall contain the highest amount of postconsumer and recovered materials practicable. In all cases, products must meet reasonable performance standards.
(2) Bidders shall be encouraged to use recycled content whenever practicable. (3) The Town will favorably consider the selection of recycled content and renewable materials, products in cases where availability, fitness, operational efficiency, quality, safety, and price of the recycled product is otherwise equal to, or better that the nonrecycled content and/or non-renewable alternative. (4) Environmentally preferable products and services that are comparable to standard counterparts are preferred. The bid amounts of environmentally preferable products or services that otherwise conform with this chapter shall be deemed reduced by 5% of said bid amount for purposes of evaluating the bid.
(b) Electric vehicles. The Town shall give preference to the purchase of electric vehicles.

Any purchase of electric vehicles shall be consistent with all applicable Town electric fleet policies.

ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
227
6 (c) Consistency with Town environmental policies. All purchases pursuant to this Chapter shall be consistent with any and all current and future Town environmental policies, as applicable.

SECTION 4: Title 2 “Administration” Chapter 5 “Town Manager” is amended as follows.

Deleted language in strikeout, new language in underline, existing language unchanged. 2-2.08 – Powers and duties.

The Town Manager shall be Chief Administrative Officer of the Town government under the direction and control of the Town Council. The Town Manager shall be responsible to the Council for the efficient administration of all the affairs of the Town which are under his/her/their his or her control. In addition to general powers as administrative head, and not as a limitation thereon, it shall be the Town Manager's duty and he or she he/she/they shall have the powers set forth in the following subsections:
(n) Purchase of supplies. Subject to and in accordance with the purchasing provisions of the Town (Chapter 5 of this title), to direct and supervise the purchase and acquisition of all property, equipment, services, materials, and supplies for the Town, and for all departments and divisions thereof, consistent with the provisions of Town Municipal Code Title 2, Chapter 5 “Purchasing”. provided the purchase or acquisition has been approved by the Council or is included in a budget which has been approved and adopted by the Council. No expenditure shall be submitted or recommended to the Council except on a report or approval by the Town Manager;
SECTION 5: Severability. The Town Council hereby declares every section, paragraph, sentence, clause, and phrase is severable. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of these ordinance amendments are for any reason found to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity, or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases.

SECTION 6: Effective Date. This Ordinance Amendment shall go into effect thirty (30) days from its adoption and shall be posted or published as required by state law.

INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED AT A PUBLIC HEARING at a regular meeting of the San Anselmo Town Council on ____________, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

RECUSED:

ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 9 - ATTACHMENT 1
228
Town of San Anselmo
Staff Report
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 10.

FROM:

Sean Condry, P.E., CBO - Public Works and Building Director SUBJECT:

Emergency Sinkhole Response at Center Boulevard Bridge

RECOMMENDATION
That the Council acknowledge the emergency repairs required by the undermining of Center Boulevard Bridge at Sycamore Avenue.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
On Monday, April 11, 2022, a business owner in San Anselmo notified Central Marin Police Authority (CMPA) about a sinkhole 3’-4’ wide on the southwest corner of the Center Boulevard Bridge. Ross Valley Fire Department responded quickly by shutting down the Center Boulevard Bridge with the assistance of CMPA.

Utilities were notified along with Public Works at approximately 3:30 pm and Public Works staff and crew responded immediately.

Upon inspection by Town staff, it was determined that the sinkhole was significantly larger underground and had undermined about two-thirds of the Center Boulevard Bridge abutment foundation on the west side of the bridge. The undermining appeared to be caused by a failed corrugated metal storm drainpipe (CMP) from Sycamore Avenue along with erosion on the creek side of the abutment. Ross Valley Sanitary District assisted by videoing the failed storm drain for the Town.

The bridge, street, and adjacent private parking lot were immediately barricaded off by Public Works crew while staff proceeded to move forward with design and repair options. Center Boulevard and the bridge serve over 10,000 vehicles per day. Center Boulevard is a main arterial roadway in San Anselmo and its repair was a high priority for the Town. On the morning of Tuesday, April 12 Van Midde Concrete began repair work of the undermined abutment foundation by excavating earth and installing rebar for a new below-grade retaining wall that sistered and underpinned the existing abutment.

On Wednesday, April 13 the sistered abutment and underpinning concrete were completed while the parking lot sinkhole and undermined street were excavated. Marin Sanitary took the soil off-haul free of charge. On Thursday, April 14 Miksis Services repaired the end of the failed storm drain and the sinkholes were backfilled.

On Thursday, April 14, Nerviana Paving began grinding the road to prepare for paving. Paving plants were anticipated to be closed on Friday, due to pending rain but with the help of Nerviana Paving and Dutra Town of San Anselmo Page 1 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™229
TO: Town Council 4/26/2022 Item #: 10.

Materials, paving was supplied and installed. Paving was completed midday on Friday and Fine Line Striping completed striping of the street, which allowed the bridge to reopen by approximately 3:30 pm on Friday, April 15.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost for the emergency repairs is estimated to be about $175,000 to $200,000 in total. Funding for the emergency bridge and road repairs will come from the Emergency Fund.

CEQA
The Town finds this project to be statutorily exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15269 (Emergency Projects). Specifically, the emergency repair was undertaken by the Town to repair and restore an existing road damaged by land subsidence. (14 CCR §15269(d)). Additionally, the repair would be categorically exempt under the CEQA Class 1 exemption, because it involves maintenance of existing streets, will not create additional automobile lanes, and involves negligible or no expansion of use. (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15301(c)).

CONCLUSION
Center Boulevard Bridge serves over 10,000 vehicles per day and is a main arterial road through San Anselmo and the Ross Valley. Caltrans inspects the bridges in Town on an annual basis. The bridge is approved for replacement by Caltrans and is structurally deficient. However, funding is delayed so it may be some time before a design is complete and the bridge is replaced. The Town inspects and has repaired other bridges; however, considering the issues associated with the undermining of this bridge by erosion and a failed storm pipe, the Public Works Department will do additional annual inspections of all bridges immediately following winter rains or large storms.

Staff believes that the undermining of this bridge may have occurred with the big storms in October during the flood event that occurred and by subsequent rains this past winter. Based on this, it is imperative that additional inspections occur beyond the routine annual inspection by Caltrans. In addition, staff has wanted to create a Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) which would look at all storm drains throughout Town but focused on CMP which are known to fail due to age and type of material. To create an SDMP the Town would need to allocate funding from existing funds or look at creating a drainage impact fee or parcel tax like other jurisdictions.

Town staff would like to thank Van Midde Concrete, Nerviana Paving, Miksis Services, Fine Line Striping, Marin Sanitary Services, Dutra Materials, Maggiora & Ghilotti, and Miller Pacific Engineering for their immediate response and assistance to the Town. Without this community response by local contractors, consultants, and Town staff and crew, the repair of the road in such an expeditious fashion would not have been possible.

Town of San Anselmo Page 2 of 2 Printed on 4/21/2022
powered by Legistar™230

San Anselmo City CouncilApril 26, 2022

San Anselmo City Council
April 26, 2022